How can a dynamic, multidimensional measure of social exclusion be developed and applied? This chapter from the book ‘Understanding Social Exclusion’ illustrates this process by applying a definition of social exclusion to the British Household Panel Survey, 1991-1998. The study examines different dimensions of social exclusion at specific points in time, analysing the degree of individuals’ participation in ‘key activities’ by number of dimensions and by duration. Developing an empirical measure of social exclusion involves clarifying which outcomes matter for their own sake rather than as indicators of other problems. The measurement tools available, however, do not address the extent to which non-participation is voluntary.
An individual is said to be socially excluded “if he or she does not participate in key activities of the society in which he or she lives”. This working definition highlights two important elements of the concept: that social exclusion is a) relative to the time and place in question and b) focuses on participation, leaving open which activities are regarded as key.
To measure exclusion in Britain in the 1990s, four dimensions are used: consumption, production, political engagement and social interaction. Each dimension represents an outcome considered important in its own right; lack of participation in any one dimension is sufficient for social exclusion.
Inclusion or exclusion on each dimension is a matter of degree. Setting relevant thresholds involves determining the standard at which to measure exclusion: is a person excluded relative to their neighbourhood, locality, or nation? This can be decided by using the level at which policy is most likely to be implemented. (In the UK, for example, there are national policy tools for social security and employment which relate to the consumption and production dimensions, and so the authors adopt national standards for these dimensions.)
- As the proportion of the population deemed ‘excluded’ depends on the threshold chosen, the relationship between the dimensions of exclusion may be of more interest than the levels of exclusion on each dimension.
- Calculating the number of dimensions on which individuals are excluded gives an indication of the extent to which ‘excluded’ groups overlap.
- The proportion of the sample who experience some exclusion on the longitudinal measure but who are not excluded throughout is an indicator of the degree of mobility in that dimension.
- When the multidimensional and longitudinal measures are combined in a single index, an individual’s score is the number of dimensions on which he or she is excluded, multiplied by the total duration of that exclusion.
- The study finds that for Britain, inclusion and exclusion are on a continuum, both across dimensions and by duration. This does not fit with the idea of exclusion as involving an ‘underclass’, but draws attention to the possibility of an ‘overclass’ who protect a privileged position.
Measurement, and the kinds of measures used, can have an important impact on policy. Failing to distinguish between risk factors and outcomes, and using a high number of indicators enables governments to focus only on areas where progress has been made. The most significant gap between the concept and measurement tools available relates to the question of agency. While social exclusion is usually framed in terms of opportunity to participate, indicators measure actual participation or non-participation.
