Social exclusion (sociologische deel) 2019-2020
lesnotities
LES 1 ON SOCIAL EXCLUSION, INEQUALITY AND POVERTY: A CONCEPTUAL EXPLORATION
Social exclusion: a polysemic concept
History of a concept
• origins of concept in France in 1970s
• used to refer to social categories unprotected by the welfare state (low educated,…)
• social insurance against predictable risks of ‘standard’ family
→ assumptions about how people lived → in standardized families + were abled
+ had work → but not valid for everybody and those are then excluded.
• concept expanded and changed in response to social and political crises (more
categories were discovered that fell out of the welfare state (bv. migrants,
youngsters,….)
• spread across Europe from late 1980s onwards (e.g. EU policy documents)
• In 1970 highdays of the welfare state they believed that poverty would disappear →
someone noticed that despite this, there were categories that were not protected! If
you could not contribute, you were not protected.
A polysemic concept:
• Social exclusion= a polysemic concept= it has multiple meanings
• problem for comparison → bv. How many people were excluded in the 1970’s
compared to now?
• ….but also opportunity to learn about different ‘realities’
• informed by political ideologies and associated social science paradigms → bv. Marx
was a scientist but also had a political ideology.
• source to capture complexity of actually existing social exclusion
Three paradigms
• exclusion refers to changing nature of social disadvantage
→ exclusion from what? ... social order
→ different modes of social integration:
➢ externally imposed bv. The police
➢ voluntary interaction between individuals bv. In de les de prof
gehoorzamen omdat je iets wilt bijleren.
➢ national cultural and value consensus bv. Mutual respect → they are
shared and do not need to be said explicitly.
➢ … identify different causes for social exclusion
→ If you know what mode of integration is dominant in a place, you know what kind
of social exclusion there is.
1
,Social exclusion (sociologische deel) 2019-2020
lesnotities
1. Solidarity paradigm
• rooted in French Republican tradition
• social integration through cultural boundaries and group solidarity
• solidarity is social bond between society and individual nurtured through a collective
conscience (=shared values) and tied together through institutions
• state (Republic) promises citizens subsistence and right to work
• in return citizens participate in work and public life
• exclusion occurs when cultural bond breaks down and individuals are no longer
morally integrated in society’s institutions.
→ Bv. In Frankrijk heftig hoofddoeken debat want hoofddoek zou aantonen dat men
niet bij de groep wilt horen. = cultural subcommunities are seen as problematic.
2. Specialisation paradigm
• associated with Anglosaxon liberalism
• social order network of voluntary exchange and association between autonomous
individuals with own interests → pursuing your self-interest → bv. Als een
hoofddoek dragen uw keuze is = oke.
• leads to specialised, interdependent and competing groups and social structures
• exclusion as discrimination; when group boundaries impede individual freedom to
participate in social exchanges. = when free choice is taken away.
• exclusion is individual process of ‘disaffiliation’ from social and economic networks
• rights to social insurance legitimated on basis of contributions made during
employment (social liberalism – social contract) = voluntary contributing is a social
contract to be protected when situations occur.
3. Monopoly paradigm
• associated with social democracy
• social order coercive, imposed through hierarchical power relations
• exclusion as result of ‘social closure’, when institutional and cultural boundaries not
only keep others out against their will but also serve to perpetuate inequality.
→ As a group, closing recources off for other people = exclusion.
→ Vb. dokwerker: they are usually male, low-skilled and white
You need to de qualified (certified), so not all people without a job can just go
work at the doks = monopolisation = exlusion
→ The only way to break through this monomolisation is with power and coercion.
• labour market segmentation bv. Males in high jobs.
Defining the concept: from social difference to social exclusion
• social exlcusion starts from social difference bv. Income, gender, age
• from social difference to social exclusion→ two general social processes:
1. hierarchisation of social positions → bv. Male more important then female,…
2. development of fault lines → segregation bv. In bathrooms, gay bars,..
2
,Social exclusion (sociologische deel) 2019-2020
lesnotities
and … poverty (= a specific part of social exclusion)
→ but a social difference can also be irrelevant to exlcusion such as eye color.
Fault lines?
= fault lines are gaps or ‘sudden discontinuities’
→ different types of fault lines:
o social-relational fault lines, e.g. isolation from
certain social networks
o social-economic fault lines, e.g. segmentation of
labour markets
o spatial fault lines, e.g. ghetto’s, gated communities,
low mobility, core-periphery
o institutional fault lines, e.g. lack of accessibility to certain institutions
o cultural fault lines, e.g. ethnic-cultural boundaries between groups
Social differentiation
• No hierarchical ordering of social positions, no fault lines (eye color)
• infinite differentiation, most of which does not acquire socially significance
• social differentiation does not automatically lead to social inequality
Social fragmentation
Non-hierarchical relations, but fault lines
→ Examples:
o ‘Genuine’ multicultural society’
o Polycentric city
o Subcultures
Social inequality
• Hierarchical relations but no fault lines
• Differential access to valued resources
• Main parameters:
o overall amount of inequality
o rigidity
o ascription (vs achievement)
o crystallization
3
, Social exclusion (sociologische deel) 2019-2020
lesnotities
Social exclusion
• Hierarchical organisation of social positions and separation by fault lines
→ social exclusion seen from different paradigms:
o solidarity paradigm: from shared culture and norms, embodied in public
institutions – stresses fault lines and may even establish cultural hierarchies
o monopoly paradigm: from access to valuable resources and political rights,
through social closure– stresses hierarchical organisation of social positions
and fault lines
o specialisation paradigm: from freely entering in relationship with people or
becoming member of social group– stresses illegitimate effect of hierarchies,
but does not question fault lines (if result of free choice)
• social exclusion according to monopoly: paradigm closest to mainstream in social
stratification, i.e. sociological approach of inequality = closest to sociology.
→ Many sociologists attentive to role of structural power in society and how it plays
out in multiple societal domains (social, cultural, economic and political sphere).
→ Social inequality takes on a group form (e.g. class, gender, ethnicity, etc.).
→No seamless and continuous distribution of incomes but ‘institutionalized groups’
with pre-packaged combinations of valued goods.
Poverty
Defining poverty as a form of social exclusion
→ no mention of income in this definition!
→ People are poor when they are excluded on several points in their life
→ Relationship between the poor and the rest of society
→ Structural intervention is needed bv. Minimun income.
4