Social exclusion: Challenges for civil society organisations

Social exclusion describes a process by which certain groups are systematically discriminated
against because of their caste, religion, gender, disability, HIV status, migrant status or other factors.

This discrimination occurs in public institutions, such as the legal system or education and health
services, as well as social institutions like the household.

Social exclusion keeps a social group outside power centres and resources. It takes the form of
segregation from the social, political, economic, cultural, educational and religious domains of
society. It thus imbues a sense of superiority and inferiority in members of a society or culture and
results in a system of domination and subjugation. These processes ultimately lead to oppression
and exploitation.

Tackling social exclusion will be a major plank of the second phase of the PACS Programme (PACS-
II) (to read a report on this, click here). A thematic session was devoted to the subject at the ‘What it
takes to eradicate poverty’ conference organised in New Delhi in December 2007, to mark the end of
the first phase of the PACS Programme.

Against this background, this article outlines:

 Why social exclusion matters in the development process/programmes.

 How social exclusion is defined.
 How the term is used across the world.
 Conceptual framework of social exclusion.
 Problems with the concept at the theoretical and practical level.
 How social exclusion works in India.
 Why we in India have to deal with social exclusion.
 How social exclusion can be quantified and monitored.
 How CSOs can work with social exclusion.
 Challenges of working with social exclusion.

Why social exclusion matters

A DFID policy paper ‘Reducing poverty by tackling social exclusion’ explains that social exclusion
matters because it denies some people the same rights and opportunities as are afforded to others in
their society. Simply because of who they are, certain groups cannot fulfil their potential, nor can they
participate equally in society (to read the DFID paper in PDF format, click here).

Social exclusion causes poverty and gets in the way of poverty reduction. It causes poverty in two
ways:

 By hurting excluded groups materially.

 By reducing their productive capacity.

Affected groups are hurt materially in terms of income, health or education. They are denied access
to resources, markets and public services. They can also be hurt emotionally, as they are shut out of
the life of their community.

Socially excluded people are often denied the opportunities available to others to increase their
income and escape from poverty by their own efforts. So, even though the economy may grow and
general income levels may rise, excluded people are likely to be left behind, and make up an
increasing proportion of those who remain in poverty.

Poverty reduction policies often fail to reach them unless they are specifically designed to do so, the
DFID paper stresses.

Second, social exclusion reduces the productive capacity -- and rate of poverty reduction -- of society
as a whole. It impedes the efficient operation of market forces and restrains economic growth. For
example, people with good ideas may not be able to raise the capital to start up a business. Or
discrimination in the labour market may make parents decide it is not worth investing in their
children’s education.

Exclusion does not cause poverty through a simple sorting of those who are ‘in’ or ‘out’, those who
can or cannot participate in society. Socially excluded groups often do participate in economic growth
processes, but they do so on unequal terms. Labour markets illustrate this most clearly. The
powerlessness of excluded groups is exploited and at the same time their disadvantaged position is
reinforced.

Defining social exclusion

The term ‘social exclusion’ has begun to be used more frequently only very recently, and there are
points of disagreement among academicians and activists about its exact meaning.

For instance, there are some who use the term social exclusion frequently at the expense of other
concepts that are equally important in order to understand the social processes that go on in the
Indian sub-continent with regard to social interaction, power equations, distribution of resources,
equal opportunity, domination and subjugation. There are others who avoid using the term and use
only terms like ‘marginalisation’ or ‘deprivation’.

Looking at the issue in a broad sense, social exclusion can be defined as:

 Denial of ownership, access and control over resources.

 Denial of rights over one’s labour and rights over one’s reproductive resources.
 Denial of opportunities for education, healthcare, housing, public amenities, recreational
facilities and spaces, basic needs, etc.
 Denial of social interaction and denial of access to social spaces.
 Denial of rights to representation and participation in social, economic, political and cultural
aspects of society and polity.
 Deprivation of the right to mobility, right to practise one’s religion and the right to organise
and mobilise.
 Denial of human dignity.
 Denial of constitutional and human rights.

Socially excluded groups suffer from some or all of these denials.

How the term is used across the world

The term ‘social exclusion’ was originally used in France in the 1970s to refer to various categories of
people, labelled ‘social problems’, who were unprotected by social insurance.

Since the late-1980s, the European Commission has embraced the concept. In Britain, the Labour
government of Tony Blair set up a cross-departmental Social Exclusion Unit to address issues of
poverty, relative deprivation and social exclusion across many regions of the United Kingdom.

The notion of social exclusion exists to some extent in the US under the label ‘underclass’. In
Australia, use of the concept of social exclusion draws on that adopted by the US and some
elements of the concept in the UK.

Social exclusion has of course become increasingly important in the development debate on less
developed countries of the world, particularly after the World Social Summit in Copenhagen in 1995.
Several multilateral development agencies, including the World Bank and the International Labour
Organisation, use the concept.

It is important to note however that the concept is used differently in different parts of the world.

Conceptual framework of social exclusion

H Silver in ‘Social exclusion and social solidarity: three paradigms’ (International Labour Review, Vol
133, No 6, 1994) introduces three paradigms of social exclusion, each grounded in a different
conception of integration and citizenship. The three paradigms are:

 Solidarity paradigm
 Specialisation paradigm
 Monopoly paradigm

Each paradigm attributes exclusion to a different cause. Each is based on different political
philosophies and has different policy implications. That is, in each paradigm, exclusion has different
causes and meanings.

The solidarity paradigm is founded on the French republican idea that the State and its citizens share
some core values and rights, around which a social order is constructed. A variety of institutions
provide the mechanisms for integrating individuals in society. Exclusion occurs when these
institutions fail.

In this view, the excluded include the mentally and physically handicapped, suicidal people, aged
invalids, abused children, substance abusers, delinquents, single parents, multi-problem households,
marginal asocial persons, and other social ‘misfits’.

The specialisation paradigm is dominant in the US. It is part of the liberal individualism philosophy,
which underlies new classical economics. In this view, societies are composed of individuals with
diverse interests and capabilities. The social order is seen as networks of voluntary exchanges.
Exclusion occurs when the capacity of individuals and groups to engage freely in these exchanges is
impeded as a result of government action or discriminatory practices.

In the specialisation paradigm, markets are the key to social improvements. The solution to exclusion
within this paradigm is to create more jobs by lowering wages and eliminating rigid employment
regulations.

The monopoly paradigm is dominant in Western Europe and is influenced by ideas of Marx.
Exclusion is seen as a consequence of group monopoly. Rules that determine access to the more
privileged groups also determine who is excluded. In this paradigm, the solution to exclusion lies in
extension of citizenship rights to the excluded.

These three paradigms are not exhaustive; they do however indicate the different ways in which
social exclusion is conceptualised and can serve different political purposes.

Problems with the concept at the theoretical and practical level

A serious charge made against proponents of the concept of social exclusion is that it says nothing
more about the processes underlying inequality than what has already been articulated in analyses of
poverty. For example, in his seminal work ‘Poverty in the United Kingdom’, Peter Townsend defined
poverty as “being excluded from ordinary living patterns, customs and activities”. Definitions of social
exclusion are not fundamentally different from this definition.
Another objection is that the term is vague and it is precisely for this reason that politicians within the
European Community adopted it as a mainstream policy issue in the late-1980s. That is, politicians
used the concept without saying precisely what it meant in substance (to read more about conceptual
problems with social exclusion see ‘A Critique of the Concept of Social Exclusion and its Utility for
Australian Social Housing Policy’ by Kathy Arthurson and Keith Jacobs, Australian Housing and
Urban Research Institute, 2003).

According to one critical view of recent work on social exclusion, various people are just picking up
the term and “running all over the place arranging seminars and conferences to find a researchable
content in an umbrella concept for which there is limited theoretical underpinning” (‘The Contradictory
Concepts of Social Exclusion and Social Inclusion’ by Else Oyen in ‘Social Exclusion and Anti-
Poverty Policy’, edited by Charles Gore and Jose B Figueiredo, International Institute of Labour
Studies, Geneva, 1997).

As Amartya Sen argues in ‘Social Exclusion: Concept, Application and Scrutiny’ (Office of
Environment and Social Development, Asian Development Bank, 2000), the usefulness of the
concept of social exclusion has to be evaluated by asking the following questions:

 Does it contribute to our understanding of the nature of poverty?

 Does it help in identifying causes of poverty that may be otherwise neglected?
 Does it enrich thinking on policy and social action in alleviating poverty?
 How would our understanding of poverty be any different if we were to ignore the literature of
social exclusion altogether?
 How would the policies chosen be any different?

As discussed later in this paper, in the Indian context the concept of social exclusion does help in
identifying causes of poverty that may be otherwise neglected, and it has the potential of enriching
thinking on policy and social action.

Nevertheless, use of the concept is beset with problems. A report that reviewed experiences of
working on social exclusion within the DFID found that there was a diversity of definitions and views
on social exclusion among staff in the organisation (‘DFID Social Exclusion Review’ by Jo Beall and
Laure-Hélène Piron, London School of Economics and Overseas Development Institute, 2005).

Most staff felt that the concept was important but also that it was ‘in the air’. Depending on their
perspective, people emphasised different elements of social exclusion. Most felt it accompanied, but
was not synonymous with poverty or inequality. For example, someone can be from a wealthy social
group and excluded from the mainstream of society.

Some staff focused on exclusion from livelihood opportunities and economic participation, while
others saw it as a source of grievances that could lead to violent conflict. Some placed emphasis on
exclusion from social or political participation, or saw it as the denial of rights or exclusion from
citizenship.

A minority did not find the concept useful. Some saw the notion of inequality as being more
important. They felt that social exclusion implied a focus on the ‘softer’ side of development.

A small minority of respondents used the concept of social exclusion synonymously with ‘poverty’,
‘problems of access’, a ‘rights-based approach’, the non-income dimensions of poverty and issues to
do with voice, empowerment and political participation.

It is thus clear that there are diverse viewpoints on social exclusion at the practical level. Before
embarking on a social exclusion agenda, any development organisation needs to create conceptual
clarity among staff and all stakeholders. Such clarity is not difficult in the Indian context.
How social exclusion works in India

In a paper ‘Social Exclusion: A Conceptual and Theoretical Framework’, presented at the PACS
Programme’s poverty conference held in New Delhi in December 2007, Dr Prakash Louis of the
Bihar Social Institute defines two types of excluded persons in the Indian context:

 Social groups
 Sectoral groups

Social groups include dalits/untouchables/lower castes, tribals/adivasis/indigenous peoples, religious

and linguistic minorities, the most backward castes, and especially women and children among these
social groups.

Prominent examples of sectoral groups are agricultural labourers, marginalised farmers, child
labourers, domestic workers, informal workers/unorganised sector workers, contract workers,
plantation workers, fishing communities, manual scavengers, rural and forest-based communities,
vernacular speaking social groups, and people with disability.

Everyday forms of social exclusion suffered by these social groups include being termed
‘untouchables’ -- a socially excluding reference to a group of people who contribute to the overall
cleanliness of society. This form of exclusion under the caste system gets legitimacy from religious
texts and beliefs.

Hence, in the Indian context, institutionalised attempts to exclude, to segregate or to cast out a
segment of the population from the social order play a crucial role. “This is not a situation where a
particular individual ‘ill-treats’ another person; instead, the social process itself is discriminatory in its
principles and practice. Thus, social segregation is an institutionalised form of social distancing
expressed in physical separation.”

As social exclusion is not only about attitudes but is built into the social structure, changing attitudes
will not necessarily change social exclusion. The social structure of a society contributes to the
formation of its attitude, and the attitude in turn contributes to the maintenance of the social structure.
There is no easy way out of this horribly vicious cycle.

Since social exclusion is about domination, discrimination and deprivation, those who benefit from it
do not want to introduce any change, while those who are discriminated against, who are supposed
to be ‘inferior’, ‘incapable’, ‘less meritorious’ and ‘lower’ are not in a position to mobilise and organise
to alter the existing social system. They do not want to remain in the dehumanising social order but
fear that they may be subjected to repression if they resist exclusion and discrimination.

Inspired by the ideas of Dr B R Ambedkar and others, dalits have initiated transformation not only in
nomenclature but also in perceptions about themselves and about the perceptions of others about
them. This has resulted in a serious difference between the perceptions of dalits and dominant
castes.

During discussions in workshops on reconstruction of the dalit identity in six northern states, by the
Bihar Social Institute, it was found that the negative and derogatory perception of the dominant
castes about dalits is that they are dirty and filthy, thieves and robbers, lazy, gluttonous (pethu,
khau), dishonest and ungrateful. This negates the reality. For instance, empirical data does not
support the perception that dalits are gluttons. The reality is that dalits, like anyone else, eat to
survive. Studies have shown that since dalits are often deprived of a regular supply of food, they
consume food as and when available.

Dalits’ perceptions about themselves is that they capable but get no opportunities; that they are
hardworking but do not get the fruits of their labour; that they are often put in a situation where they
are forced to rob or lie; that they are culturally talented and are not immoral, on the contrary they are
sensitive and emotional. Some would argue that this perception is unrealistic, even aspirational.
However, Dr Louis argues that a community that is at the receiving end also has scope for looking at
the reality of their lives in a positive light.

Tribals face a peculiar dilemma. They have been organising to ensure their rights, shed their
backwardness and protect their culture and natural resources. But whereas formerly they were totally
isolated, now they are the victims of discrimination. Non-tribals see tribals in a derogatory manner,
particularly their food habits and ways of living, which are very different. The strong emerging tribal
identity, however, sees them as the first inhabitants of this country who have contributed much to the
culture, history and heritage of India, though little respect is today shown to their culture, social
systems, political structures and economy.

Women are the most excluded and discriminated segment of the Indian population. Patriarchy is at
the core of the structural element discriminating against women. Control of women’s reproductive
abilities and sexuality is in men’s hands. Patriarchy limits women’s ownership and control of property
and other economic resources, including the products of their own labour.

Women’s mobility is constrained, and their access to education and information hindered. Over the
years, it has been recognised that the experiences of a majority of women are grounded in both
poverty and patriarchy. Both these feed into each other and subject women to exclusion and
exploitation.

The Muslim community is another excluded group in India. There are more Muslims who live below
the poverty line than any other group. They also earn much less (on average, Rs 22,807 per year as
against Rs 25,653 for all others). Only 21% of Muslims use the public distribution system, which
provides subsidised foodgrain, as compared to 33.2% of the general population. Enrolment of Muslim
children in schools is low (61.6%, while it is 71.4% for the general population), and the dropout rate is
higher. Neither at the policy level nor in programme interventions do Muslims get their due share as
citizens of this country.

In this environment, Dr Louis points out, social exclusion is multiple and cumulative. For instance, a
dalit or tribal girl suffers multiple exclusions by being excluded due to caste and ethnic reasons, and
further excluded by location if she lives in a rural area where she cannot avail of facilities available to
those in urban areas. If she is a differently-abled person, she suffers further discrimination by being
deprived of life-enhancing mechanisms (to read Dr Louis’ paper in PDF format, click here).

Why we in India have to deal with social exclusion

In his paper ‘Caste, Social Exclusion and Poverty Linkages -- Concept, Measurement and Empirical
Evidence’, Sukhadeo Thorat explains how one of the most widespread and powerful forms of
exclusion -- that based on caste -- works.

The caste system divides people into social groups in which the civil, cultural and economic rights of
each individual caste are predetermined or ascribed by birth and made hereditary. The assignment of
civil, cultural and economic rights is, therefore, unequal and hierarchal (to read Sukhadeo Thorat’s
paper in PDF format, click here).

Moreover, it provides for a regulatory mechanism to enforce the social and economic organisation --
social ostracism -- and justifies it on religious grounds.

Caste-based exclusion and discrimination denies its victims access not only to economic rights but
also to civil, cultural and political rights and opportunities. Caste-based exclusion thus prevents
disadvantaged groups from interacting freely and productively with others and taking part in the full
economic, social and political life of the community.
Exclusion in action

Exclusion can be practised in the labour market through the denial of jobs; in the capital market
through the denial of access to capital; in agriculture through the denial of sale, purchase or leasing
of land; and in the consumer market through the denial of sale and purchase of commodities and
consumer goods.

Discrimination can occur through what Amartya Sen describes as “unfavourable inclusion”, namely,
through differential treatment in the terms and conditions of a contract, discrimination in the price
charged and received by discriminated groups, in fees and services for water and electricity, rent on
houses, and paying a higher price for goods bought.

An ActionAid study of 347 villages in 10 Indian states, conducted in 2000, found that discrimination in
labour markets operates through exclusion in hiring and lower wages. In about 36% of the villages
surveyed, scheduled castes (SCs) were denied casual employment in agriculture. In about 25% of
villages, SCs were paid less than the prevailing market wage rate, or wages paid to non-SC workers.

The ‘pollution’ and ‘purity’ concepts associated with untouchability excluded lower castes from
participation in consumer markets. In 35% of villages, SCs were not allowed to sell goods in the
village market, and in 47% of villages they were not allowed to sell milk to village cooperatives or to
private buyers. Sale of bakery products and vegetables was also not allowed in some cases, forcing
SCs to go further afield, to villages and towns were their caste identity was unknown. In about one-
third of the villages, SCs were excluded from employment in the construction of homes.

Exclusion and discrimination can occur in terms of access to the fulfilment of social needs, as
supplied by the government or public institutions. The ActionAid study observed that in little more
than one-third of the villages, SCs were denied access to irrigation water for agriculture. In some
states, they were restricted from buying agricultural land and using public land for agriculture and
housing. In the case of access to common property resources like grazing land, fishing ponds, etc,
SCs faced exclusion in about one-fifth of the sample villages (21%).

There is also denial of access, or access with differential treatment, in food security programmes
such as the midday meal scheme and fair price shops. Thorat quotes a study based on a sample of
about 550 villages from five states -- Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and
Rajasthan -- which reported that exclusion and discriminatory treatment afflicts more than one out of
three fair price shops and more than one out of three government schools serving midday meals
(averages for five states of 35.5% and 37%, respectively). In terms of geographical spread, it is
unquestionably a nationwide problem with respondents from every state reporting caste
discrimination and exclusion in the midday meal scheme.

While complete denial of access to particular water sources (like wells, tanks, tubewells), village
shops, health clinics, transport used for public purposes, services offered by washerpersons,
carpenters, tailors and potters is the most clear form of social exclusion, even more common is the
imposition of deferential treatment in access to these. In about one-third of the villages covered by
the ActionAid study there was separate seating arrangements for dalits and separate cups for them
to drink from. Similar forms of discrimination were observed in purchases from shops, entry into
public transport, and treatment at private health clinics.

The civil rights of marginalised communities are also constrained. Protective legislations such as the
Anti-Untouchability Act, 1955 (renamed the Civil Rights Act in 1979) and the Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are underutilised. In seeking legal safeguards
and protection, SC/STs also suffer discrimination in access. When they seek to register a police
case, obstacles are put in their way at various levels -- the village sarpanch, police and public
prosecutors. Only 1.56% of civil rights cases registered in 1991 ended in convictions. The conviction
rate came down to .60% in 1999 and 0.85% in 2000.

Women belonging to marginalised groups suffer triple deprivation arising out of lack of access to
economic resources, caste and gender discrimination. Most SC and ST women don’t own agricultural
land and work as wage labourers. In 2001, around 57% of SC and 37% of ST women were
agricultural wage labourers in rural areas compared to 29% for non-SC/STs. Only 21% of SC women
were cultivators compared to 51% of ST women and 45% of non-SC/ST women.

SC/ST women also lack education. In 2000, the literacy rate among SC and ST rural females (aged
15 and above) was 24% and 23% respectively, compared to 41% for non-SC/ST women. In urban
areas the literacy rate among SC females was the lowest, at 48% for SCs and 54% for STs
compared to 70% for non-SC/ST women.

The health status of socially excluded communities is also compromised. In his paper ‘Social
exclusion, caste and health: A review based on the social determinants framework’, K R Nayar of the
Centre of Social Medicine and Community Health, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, shows
how poverty, social exclusion and deprivation have a major impact on health.

A 2007 study by the Centre of Social Medicine and Community Health examined data on prevalence
of anaemia, treatment of diarrhoea, infant mortality rate, utilisation of maternal healthcare, and
childhood vaccinations among the different caste groups in India. The data, based on the Second
National Family Health Survey (NFHS II) showed that the proportion of women and children with
anaemia was high among the scheduled tribe population. Neonatal mortality, infant mortality, child
and under-5 mortality are highest among scheduled castes, Nayar points out. Much higher
proportions of scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other backward castes do not avail of any
treatment for diarrhoea, the proportion of scheduled castes being the greatest.

The same pattern is discernible in the case of maternity care. The proportion of scheduled caste and
scheduled tribe women who have not availed of any antenatal care is considerably higher compared
to other castes. Institutional delivery is also comparatively lower among these excluded sections, and
complete coverage of childhood vaccinations is lowest among the scheduled castes followed by the
scheduled tribes.

On the whole, the data shows that marginalised sections such as scheduled castes/scheduled tribes
and other backward castes, who are also the poor in India, experience a ‘social gap’ in terms of
health status and health services.

There is also the issue of sexual exploitation of SC women, which includes religious prostitution in
the form of the devdasi and jogini system under which a girl is married to the village god and can be
sexually exploited by the upper caste men of the village. A primary survey estimated the number of
jogins in six districts of Andhra Pradesh at around 21,421. A similar practice exits in Tamil Nadu,
Karnataka and Maharashtra.

It is thus amply clear that social exclusion in India is a multidimensional concept that needs to be
addressed urgently as it is linked to poverty as well as denial of basic human rights. It would however
be useful to quantify social exclusion and monitor progress towards social integration goals.

One example of the usefulness of such studies is a joint DFID and World Bank Gender and Social
Exclusion Assessment in Nepal, which helped the government see how people were affected by
caste, gender and ethnic group. The study showed that the poorest group in the country was the
Muslim minority (5%) -- something that neither government nor donors had realised.

How social exclusion can be quantified and monitored

A lot of work has been done in the West to quantify social exclusion and monitor progress towards
integration. The UNDP’s Human Development Index focuses on the multi-dimensional aspects of
deprivation, while the French Action Plan for Employment provides 35 quantitative evaluation
indicators on social exclusion. The European Union is trying to establish quantitative indicators to
evaluate social inclusion initiatives. The ‘poverty charter’ of Britain’s New Labour proposed around 30
measures to track movement towards nationally defined social integration goals.

However, as Prakash Louis points out in his paper quoted above, not much work has been done in
South Asia to analyse and understand social exclusion. There is talk in some academic circles about
the need to undertake a Dalit Development Index or Dalit Deprivation Index, and, similarly, to identify
indicators for a Tribal Development Index or a Tribal Deprivation Index. A Minority Development and
Deprivation Index and a Women’s Development and Deprivation Index are also proposed.

As things stand today, most studies of caste-based exclusion in India have explored social exclusion
through case studies, and made qualitative assessments and extrapolation from simple anecdotal
evidence. Apart from the studies quoted by Sukhadeo Thorat in the paper mentioned above, there
has been little systematic empirical assessment of the impact of caste and other forms of social
exclusion on poverty.

For civil society organisations (CSOs) working on social exclusion at the field level, the first step
would be gathering and analysing statistical information to identify excluded groups and the forms
and levels of exclusion they face. An attempt must also be made to quantify the impact of exclusion.

Then, disaggregated data can be collected and analysed to monitor change relating to specific
groups over time. Statistical information can also draw attention to exclusion and strengthen
influencing strategies. Raising the visibility of excluded groups can be a powerful act in itself.

How CSOs can work with social exclusion

At a broader level, the DFID policy paper ‘Reducing poverty by tackling social exclusion’ lists four
ways in which civil society can play a role in mitigating social exclusion:

• By increasing accountability and demanding that citizens are protected by the rule of law.

• By influencing policymaking.

• By delivering services where the State will not.

• By tackling prejudice and changing behaviour.

Increasing accountability

CSOs play an important role in challenging governments and ensuring that they are more
accountable to their citizens. When governments fail excluded groups, CSOs can help them exercise
their rights and obtain redress.

In India this often takes the form of ensuring that those who are eligible for various poverty alleviation
schemes of the government are aware of the schemes and avail of the benefits. CSOs help register
people for such schemes and lobby against government officials who withhold or delay their
implementation. They also use the power of the media to highlight injustice and corruption in the
system.

Influencing policymaking

CSOs have a role in advocating increased representation and voice for excluded groups, and giving
them a say in policy- and decision-making. They can link grassroots work to national and
international policy processes. International alliances are increasingly important in linking CSOs
campaigning for groups like women and girls, children and young people, disabled people and the
elderly. Organisations like HelpAge International, for example, have developed effective alliances to
gain commitments by UN member states to improve public services and provide social protection to
the elderly.

Delivering services where the State will not

CSOs can also play a crucial role in delivering services to excluded groups that have no access to
public services. For example, in Bangladesh, large local CSOs like the Bangladesh Rural
Advancement Committee (BRAC) and Proshika play a key role in delivering education and health
services in urban slums. In India, the Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA), has had a major
impact on the lives of women in the informal sector by providing direct services such as primary
healthcare, savings and insurance. SEWA combines delivery of these services with advocacy for
policy change at the municipal, state, national and global level, challenging rules that discriminate
against the women’s interests, such as rules related to registration of trade unions.

Tackling prejudice and changing behaviour

A strategy to tackle exclusion has to challenge deep-seated attitudes and prejudices. Civil society
can play an important role in helping to change attitudes and behaviour. The media plays a vital role
too. It has the potential to reinforce prejudices as also influence positive changes in attitudes and
behaviour.

Speaking at the ‘Assembly of Poor and Discriminated’, organised by the PACS Programme and the
National Confederation of Dalit Organisations (NACDOR) at the India Social Forum (ISF) held in New
Delhi in November 2006, Sushila Zeitlyn, Senior Social Adviser, DFID, suggested that CSOs working
with socially excluded groups should develop innovative projects to use the large amount of money
available under the Union government’s Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. CSOs should look beyond the
challenge of increasing school enrolment of dalit children; they should look at sensitising non-dalit
teachers and helping illiterate parents track the performance of village schools and the progress of
their children, she suggested.

Challenges of working with social exclusion

As the DFID paper on reducing poverty by tackling social exclusion points out, not all forms of
exclusion create poverty. Hence, donor agencies and CSOs must be clear about:

 The impact of exclusion on poverty reduction.

 Who is affected, and how.
 What are the main constraints in tackling exclusion.
 Where are the entry points and opportunities for doing so.

Once we know the answers to these questions, it would be possible to decide how and where to
focus our efforts, and what types of approaches would be most appropriate. CSOs may need to be
flexible and to employ various approaches and strategies, the paper says.

CSOs must also be aware of the risks. A concern with social exclusion could lead to policies that
undermine self-reliance rather than facilitate it. CSOs need to guard against looking upon socially
excluded groups as passive recipients of welfare rather than people with equal rights who are
capable of taking their own decisions and contributing to society if given the opportunity.

CSOs should also be wary about being used by governments to provide services that governments
themselves should be providing.

CSOs have to be acutely and constantly aware of the fact that members of marginalised communities
who fight for their rights face real physical danger. Speaking at the ‘Assembly of the Poor’ at the ISF,
Shyambai from Satna (Madhya Pradesh), a district panchayat member who belongs to an SC
community, revealed that the sarpanch of her village threatened to kill her when she dared look into
irregularities in work undertaken under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme
(NREGS).

CSOs also have to ensure that, at the very least, they do not inadvertently increase social exclusion.

The long road to political empowerment

Political empowerment for marginalised groups, with the aim of capturing power at the state and
central levels, is the ultimate solution to social exclusion in India, according to some.

However this will not be easy to achieve, warned Amit Bhaduri while addressing the ‘Assembly of the
Poor’ at the ISF. Known for his writings on development with dignity, Bhaduri said oppression and
loss of social dignity in Indian society does not work through simple economic, social or political
factors but through a complex combination that cannot be addressed by electoral politics alone.

He also pointed out significant lacunae in efforts towards political empowerment made so far in the
country. Leaders of dalits and other marginalised groups must look at the history of large political
movements across the world, which clearly show that cultural symbols -- like the idea of ‘Ram Rajya’
used effectively by Gandhi -- are a key rallying point, he said. India’s poor and marginalised urgently
need an alternative cultural symbol to organise and fight against mainstream society. The challenge
before leaders of excluded groups is to develop and powerfully articulate such a symbol that captures
the aspirations of the people they represent, and provides a vision of the society they would like to
create.

http://www.empowerpoor.org/backgrounder.asp?report=704

http://www.empowerpoor.org/downloads/castepovertypaper.pdf

http://www.sddirect.org.uk/sc.php?x=3