3. DATA REQUIREMENTS FOR POVERTY
2.7 Social exclusion approaches to poverty measurement
2.7.1 Choice of indicator(s)
Domains, dimensions and indicators
Social exclusion is by definition multidimensional, and implies depri- vation in a wide range of indicators or functionings of living standards, which can be of a quantitative or qualitative type. As in a multidimen- sional measure of poverty, a measure of social exclusion needs to iden- tify the domains and dimensions along which the deprivation or disad- vantage occurs.
Typically, the social exclusion literature refers, first to the selection of domains (for example, health), then dimensions are chosen within these domains (for example, length of life in health) after which indica- tors that measure these dimensions are selected. Finally, composite mea- sures or synthetic indices are constructed that combine the dimensions into a single measure (see section 2.7.4).106
The choice of domains, dimensions and indicators is somewhat ad hoc, as the examples that follow indicate. The Statistical Programme Committee of the EU (1998) recommended three domains (1) income (2) labour market and (3) social indicators.107 Böhnke (2001), also in the context of social exclusion in the EU, argues for four “levels” of social exclusion: (1) the non-realisation of rights and the denial of access to social protection systems (for example, homelessness, illiteracy, under-
105 Many of the functionings that are considered are qualitative, or measured using a subjective or consensual approach to measurement. See more about this approach in section 2.7
nutrition) (2) disadvantages in several life domains that may interact and reinforce each other such as low income, bad housing conditions, precarious labour market attachment, unemployment (3) weak social networks and family ties, limited opportunities to take part in social, political and cultural life and (4) individual perception of opportunities and deprivation. Saunders (2003) defines three dimensions in the Aus- tralian context: lack of social interaction, domestic deprivation and extreme consumption hardship. Camara et al. (2003) mapping social exclusion in urban Brazil include four dimensions: (1) autonomy (2) life quality (3) human development and (4) equality.108 Gordon et al.
(2000) analysing social exclusion in Britain, argue for four dimensions to be included: (1) impoverishment or exclusion from adequate income or resources (2) labour market exclusion (3) service exclusion and (4) exclusion from social relations. I follow this last classification, as being both comprehensive and having a basis for justification.
Exclusion from adequate income or resources
Gordon (2002) defines poverty as the state of having both low incomes and low standards of living. Many studies of social exclusion go beyond the standard income or monetary approach in measuring poverty us- ing, in addition, measures of items lacked, as in the relative deprivation approach (pioneered in Mack and Lansley 1985), and people’s own per- ceptions of their situation, as in the subjective approach to poverty measurement (Dirven et al. 1998). For example, the project of measur- ing poverty and social exclusion in Britain in which Gordon was in- volved in used three separate measures: income poverty, necessities poverty, and subjective poverty (Bradshaw et al. 2000).
Exclusion from the labour market
A dominant theme in the social exclusion literature is labour market
108 Variables under autonomy include poverty and labour market related variables, quality of housing, and access to services are included under quality of life, literacy and education, mortal- ity and violence are included under human development, and gender equality variables under equality. These variables are specific to the conditions in São Paulo.
access. Social exclusion is identified with non-participation in the labour market and long-term unemployment. There is justification for doing so within this approach: a job provides not merely an income, but is also an arena for social contact and social interaction (Bradshaw et al.
2000).
However, Gordon (2002) points out the danger of oversimplifica- tion-for example, being employed in a job with long working hours can lead to non-participation in social activities that people themselves consider to be necessary (such as weddings and funerals), while over half the population in many countries does not participate in the labour force from “choice”, rather than exclusion, either because they are en- gaged in unpaid labour, or because they are too young or too old.109
Recent work in developed countries attempts to combine work on unemployment duration, and a larger set of labour market transitions with the concept of social exclusion-if some workers are “persistently”
excluded, that is, trapped in a vicious circle of low skilled employment, unemployment and labour market withdrawal, the policy implications are more serious than if workers spend brief episodes of exclusion fol- lowed by inclusion (Bradley et al. 2003).
Exclusion from services
An aspect of social inclusion is lack of access to basic services, both inside the home (such as electricity, water supply and sanitation) and outside (transport, markets, financial and health services). The Poverty and Social Exclusion Survey in Britain allowed researchers to identify whether households lacked access to these services because they were unavailable, or because the households could not afford them, or be- cause they did not want to. The World Development Report 2004 shows how service provision is failing the poor (World Bank 2003).
109 However, a gender-analytic approach may point out the constrained nature of the choice that operates in unpaid labour which, in certain circumstances, can lead to social exclusion.
Exclusion from social relations
The social exclusion approach is specifically interested in social interac- tion. Involuntary non-participation in socially-perceived necessary ac- tivities, isolation, perceived lack of support, lack of civic engagement and confinement were dimensions in which social exclusion was mea- sured in Britain, using data from the Poverty and Social Exclusion Sur- vey (Bradshaw et al. 2000).
Relevant domains in a developing country context
Saith (2001b) examines the feasibility of operationalizing the concept of social exclusion in developing countries. In the North, Saith (2001b) claims, patterns of social integration are institutionalised and clearly defined, and social exclusion, when applied to those outside accepted norms includes those excluded from the welfare state, social security, and in long-term unemployment. Given the differences between the North and South in terms of political history, the magnitude of insecu- rity, administrative resources and budget constraints in developing coun- tries, applying the same criteria in the South as in the North does not appear practically feasible (Saith 2001b). An alternative route is explored by Saith (2001b) in the context of “social security schemes as they have developed in developing countries”. Social security in developing coun- tries, unlike in developed countries, includes the activism of the public, non-governmental organizations, social, political and humanitarian in- stitutions as well as the activity of the state (Saith 2001b). It includes a protective dimension (such as the prevention of famines) as well as a promotive dimension (such as the alleviation of regular and persistent deprivation like endemic hunger or rampant morbidity). Saith (2001b) points out that while this latter dimension is similar to the concept of social security in developed countries, identifying individuals who do and do not benefit from the system would be very difficult. Identifica-
tion on the basis, of outcomes, rather than benefits is far more feasible.
Thus, the excluded could be those “who do not achieve certain mini- mum standards of functionings related health, nutrition and education (Saith 2001b). However, defining exclusion in relation to employment status is problematic because the majority of the population would be engaged in activity outside the organised sector, and could not be con- sidered “excluded”.
Studies in developing countries range from those that are in fact studies of multidimensional poverty, concentrating on dimensions of health, education, housing, water supply, sanitation and social security (Appasamy et al. 1996 for India) or exclusion from land (Mearns and Sinha, 1999 for Orissa, in India), to those that include exclusion from rights and social networks as well as employment, credit and insurance (Figueroa, Altamirano, and Sulmont 1996 for Peru), and those that used a subjective approach to defining social exclusion (Bedoui and Gouia 1995 for Tunisa).110 Saith (2001b) argues that many of these studies are simply revisiting old debates and discussions about the multidimen- sionality of poverty, under new terminology.
How to measure exclusion within these dimensions?
While most studies measuring exclusion state very clearly which di- mensions and indicators they use, these indicators are used in a very ad hoc. manner. The issues relating to aggregation are those that arise in any multidimensional index, and are dealt with in section 2.2.4.
Identifying groups approach
Some studies of social exclusion attempt to identify whether an indi- vidual is socially excluded or not, based on whether the individual con-
110 These are all studies reviewed by Saith (2001).
cerned belongs to a group that is considered at risk of social exclusion.
Sources of social exclusion include physical isolation, ethnicity, gender and religious discrimination, bureaucratic barriers, institutionalised road bias, corruption, intimidation and physical violence, and the nature of the local and national political elite.
The problem with this type of approach is that while it is prag- matic, it over-generalises, and is not very useful in helping to identify the socially excluded.111
Persistence and the dynamics of exclusion
The social exclusion literature refers to the importance of persistence, for example, one spell of unemployment does not make an individual socially excluded (Bradley et al. 2003, Klasen 1999). Another time-re- lated feature of social exclusion is that disadvantage is often cumula- tive-poor educational attainment and poor educational achievement (as measured by literacy and numeracy tests) have strong impacts on un- employment rates. Exclusion - or adverse inclusion or incorporation- thus, may be the cause of chronic poverty (Bird and Shepherd 2003).
Geography and exclusion
Adverse geography may limit access to resources for participation (through lack of proximity, mobility, and networks) as well as gener- ate exclusion through statistical discrimination (Klasen 1999).