Labour Force Participation,Social Inclusion and the Fair Work Act: Current and Carbon‐Constrained Contexts

The notion that employment is a precondition for personal wellbeing and social inclusion is almost sacrosanct in Australian culture. Yet, the working and living conditions of Australia's low paid workers tells a different story. While labour market participation is a cornerstone of the Federal Government's Social Inclusion Agenda, it is recognized that low pay and poor job quality often derail this key objective. Indeed, the difficulty of ‘making work pay’ at the bottom end of the labour market is a social inclusion challenge that has yet to receive the policy or public attention that it warrants. This article considers what the Fair Work Act means for the social inclusion of disadvantaged workers, in the context of wider‐ranging strategies to address low pay. It concludes with some considerations of the challenges that a carbon‐constrained economy is likely to present for labour force participation as a remedy for social exclusion.     

Social inclusion under Labor in South Australia

Social inclusion policies were championed by the former Rann Labor government in South Australia from 2002 to 2011. In 2011 the Social Inclusion Unit was dissolved by the South Australian government. It is argued that the relatively narrow focus of the former SIU on ‘problem’ communities limited its capacity to provide more than residual solutions. The diminishing political returns on social inclusion also encouraged the South Australian government to abandon this initiative. In 2014 this government has had to grapple with the end of car making in Australia and a declining manufacturing labour force, traditionally a ‘mainstream’ constituency of the Labor Party. The return to ‘mainstreaming’ social policy in South Australia might offer limited space for realignment of social policy with the concept of social citizenship. It might also represent a move away from the functionalist morality of social inclusion. Social inclusion as practiced in South Australia has limited capacity to address generalised social disadvantage. The latter is likely to concern a re‐elected Labor minority government grappling with significant job losses and a declining local economy.     

Women,Legal Aid and Social Inclusion

This article examines access to legal aid for women in light of the Australian government's social inclusion agenda. It is notable that the government's image of social citizenship does not include the ability to invoke and enforce legal rights, and that discourses of social exclusion have paid relatively little attention to gendered patterns of exclusion. The article reports on a study of applications for and refusals of legal aid for family law, domestic violence and anti‐discrimination matters by socially excluded women in Queensland. It demonstrates the variety of ways in which Legal Aid Queensland's grants process operated to further exclude and marginalise these women. It argues that effective access to legal aid is an important element of social inclusion, but that this goal cannot be achieved by reliance on the tools of New Public Management.     

The social inclusion policy agenda in Australia: a case of old wine,new bottles?

The election of an Australian Labor Government in Australia in 2007 saw ‘social inclusion’ emerge as the official and overarching social policy agenda. Being ‘included’ was subsequently defined by the ALP Government as being able to ‘have the resources, opportunities and capabilities needed to learn, work, engage and have a voice‘. Various researchers in Australia demonstrated an interest in social inclusion, as it enabled them to construct a multi‐dimensional framework for measuring disadvantage. This research program resulted in various forms of statistical modelling based on some agreement about what it means to be included in society. The multi‐dimensional approach taken by academic researchers, however, did not necessarily translate to a new model of social policy development or implementation. We argue that, similar to the experience of the UK, Australia's social inclusion policy agenda was for the most part narrowly and individually defined by politicians and policy makers, particularly in terms of equating being employed with being included. We conclude with discussion about the need to strengthen the social inclusion framework by adopting an understanding of social inequality and social justice that is more relational and less categorical.     

The Australian Social Inclusion Agenda: A New Approach to Social Policy?

The Social Inclusion Agenda (‘SIA’) was introduced by the Australian Labor Party (‘ALP’) in the lead up to the 2007 federal election. The rhetoric was hopeful, proposing to reframe the government's approach to disadvantage. Rhetoric aside, what the then opposition meant when it talked of building social inclusion (‘SI’) was less clear than may have immediately met the eye. This paper offers an introductory analysis and review of the SIA. It first considers why Australia might benefit from a readjustment in its social policy direction, reflecting on the concepts of poverty and Amartya Sen's ‘capabilities approach‘. Second, it offers a critical overview of the main conceptions of SI/Social Exclusion. Third, it applies these first two parts of analysis to developments to date with the SIA. This part, whilst limited in scope and preliminary at best, offers some general comments as to the possibilities and pitfalls of the SIA and proposes the way forward from an analytical perspective in terms of guiding the SIA in a desirable direction.     

The role of family centres in reducing social isolation in deprived communities

Social exclusion and isolation are worldwide social and health concerns with negative effects becoming exacerbated in deprived communities. There is limited understanding related to the role of community‐based centres in reducing social exclusion and isolation, so the aim of this research was to explore the role one family centre had in improving social inclusion in a deprived community in Glasgow, Scotland. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis was utilized to analyse interviews from 10 parents to explore their lived experiences of creating and developing social networks through family centre attendance. Findings indicate that attending the family centre positively impacted on social inclusion and social support for all parents interviewed. Relationships created in the centre were proposed as being meaningful, non‐judgemental and produced social capital—rooted in reciprocity and trust. Findings can inform services that aim to reduce social isolation in deprived communities.     

Social Exclusion, Inequality and Social Work

This paper sets out the environment of inequality in which social work and the poor have recently operated. It explores pragmatic and idealist arguments concerning whether or not the poor need social work. Finally, policy solutions developed in consultation with social service users and carers are suggested in relation to poverty and social exclusion. Social exclusion can be linked to relative poverty as exclusion from economic and social norms. However, there is a wider brief in our own government’s publications and those of Europe, of examining how people are excluded from actions and policies of agencies who are there to support them. This paper will retain the concepts of poverty as lack of material income, and inequality as the gap between the rich and the poor, while being aware of the policy implications for social service users and carers of the more comprehensive process of being shut out partially or fully from social, economic, political and cultural systems. The debates around social work, social exclusion and inequality that follow establish: that some of the poor do need social work; that the poverty of social service users is related to policies that have restructured welfare in Britain; that the reason for individuals approaching or being referred to social services are complex but are likely to include financial deprivation as a key contributory factor; that if the poor do need social work, advocacy is essential rather than social work being seen as concerned only with social control—taking children into care, mentally ill people into hospitals, and advising the DSS on the suitability of claimants for benefits. Finally, the discussion turns to new policy agendas on social exclusion instigated by the Labour government. What positive difference can such policies make for social service users, their carers and social workers?.     

Social development and the status quo: professionalisation and Third Way co‐optation

Gray M. Social development and the status quo: professionalisation and Third Way co‐optation Int J Soc Welfare 2010: 19: 463–470 © 2010 The Author(s), Journal compilation © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and International Journal of Social Welfare. Social development is a massive undertaking that has spawned a multitude of organisational forms. It nevertheless remains an ambiguous term and ill‐defined area of work, though some social development practitioners have succeeded in making small‐scale local differences in particular situations. While largely a tool of the status quo, some believe that social development has transformative potential and provides valuable space to confront inequalities and deprivation. In this article, I argue that in contemporary neoliberal environments social development is being co‐opted by Third Way politics and professionalisation processes. As it professionalises through the creation of professional structures and educational systems, it is becoming increasingly like social work, despite arguments that it is as an alternative approach to poverty and social exclusion. In the process, it is losing its transformative, critical edge, and morphing into a neoliberal, social investment approach that absolves government of its responsibility for the welfare of citizens.     

A Critique of the Concept of Social Exclusion and its Utility for Australian Social Housing Policy

The paper reviews the usefulness of the concept of social exclusion for Australian social housing policy. We draw on recent theoretical and empirical research from Europe and the UK to develop a critique of the concept of social exclusion. It is argued that any assessment of social exclusion needs to distinguish between its utility as an academic explanatory concept and its political deployment to justify new forms of policy intervention. Policy targeting anti‐social behaviour through increasingly more punitive means, for instance, is often justified on the basis that it ameliorates the problems of social exclusion experienced by tenants residing in public housing estates. We conclude that, in spite of the limitations of social exclusion as an analytical concept, for political and pragmatic reasons it is likely to become an important component of the emerging Australian housing policy agenda.     

Policy approaches to addressing Aboriginal social inclusion in South Australia

The concept of social inclusion has been influential in shaping many aspects of social policy in Australia over the past decade. In SA the Rann Labor government established a Social Inclusion Board in 2002, which made an important contribution to development of the SA Strategic Plan that framed SA policy directions under that government. This article considers the relevance of the concept of social inclusion for addressing the disadvantage experienced by Aboriginal South Australians. It examines the SA Social Inclusion initiative and some national measures such as the Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage and Closing the Gap initiatives and discusses the appropriateness of the methodology adopted. A number of issues are addressed: the extent of Indigenous involvement in setting targets and devising programs to achieve improved social outcomes, the relevance of the targets identified, and the problem of overlapping policy initiatives at state and national level obscuring the measurement of change against specific indicators. A particular concern is that the social inclusion approach embedded in these policies pays too little attention to the priorities and preferences of Aboriginal people and interprets ‘inclusion’ in ways that assert the cultural paradigm of non‐Indigenous Australians.     

Social Inclusion and Sport: Culturally diverse women's perspectives

Sport and recreation can help communities to build social inclusion and celebrate diversity. Yet some sport and recreation activities require conformity to social and cultural norms, risking suppressing difference and reinforcing inequality and exclusion. This paper explores these tensions by examining access and barriers to sport and recreation for a large group of Australian women: those from culturally diverse backgrounds. Qualitative data shows that while sport industry representatives justify catering primarily for a mainstream participant base, culturally diverse women identify barriers requiring strategic and targeted policy and program intervention. Implicating the spatial organisation of sport and recreation as sources of marginalisation, culturally diverse women highlight how access‐enhancing initiatives in public, commercial and community sport facilities can play key roles in promoting social inclusion.     

Understanding Social Inclusion and Its Meaning for Australia

This paper considers the various meanings of ‘social inclusion’ from both sociological and policy viewpoints. It shows how the perspective has been translated into particular policies and approaches to governance. After drawing some lessons from the policy experiences of other countries, it weighs the appropriateness of a ‘social inclusion agenda’ for Australia, a country with a particular history of social exclusion – of prisoners, indigenous people, and immigrants from around the world – and a special emphasis on dignity, respect and equal treatment.     

Social inclusion: an interplay of the determinants of health - new insights into elder abuse

Social and economic exclusion and inclusion are receiving growing attention and study in North America for their usefulness as a conceptual framework that addresses the many dimensions of poverty and inequality in our society. A discussion of social and economic exclusion/ inclusion flows naturally out of the population health field in which the social determinants of health have become well-established over the last twenty years or more. The determinants of health provide a broad and inclusive outline within which to situate prevention, early detection and effective intervention of the abuse of older persons. A Social Inclusion Lens offers exciting possibilities for addressing the issue of elder abuse and neglect.     

Comparing income poverty gap and deprivation on social acceptance: A mediation model with interpersonal communication and social support

In many developed countries or regions, wide income disparities increase the difficulty in reducing poverty. In their day‐to‐day lives, poor people often feel less accepted by the society. The failures in communicating with social groups and receiving social support lead to negative consequences on individual well‐being and higher level of social exclusion. Based on the debate upon alternative approaches to conceptualizing and operationalizing poverty, this study attempts to verify a mediation model with data from a household survey (N = 1,202) in Hong Kong. The results of structural equation modelling reveal that deprivation is a more powerful indicator than income poverty for specifying the negative relations of poverty with interpersonal communication, social support, and social acceptance; the negative impact of deprivation on social acceptance can be reduced by two significant mediators of interpersonal communication and social support. The results are discussed in terms of directions for future research and policy and welfare intervention.     

Room to move? Professional discretion at the frontline of welfare‐to‐work

Outcomes of social policies have always been mediated by the discretionary agency of front‐line staff, processes which nevertheless have received insufficient attention in policy evaluation and in the social policy literature more broadly. This article takes the case example of the policy reforms associated with the Australian government's welfare‐to‐work agenda. Drawing on two discreet research projects undertaken at different points in the policy trajectory, the practices of social workers in Centrelink – the Commonwealth government's primary service delivery agency involved in welfare‐to‐work – is examined. Centrelink social workers have been and remain one of the core groups of specialist staff since the Department's inception in the late 1940s, working to improve the well being of people in receipt of income security. Their experiences of the recent past and their expectations of the future of their professional practice as welfare reform becomes more entrenched are canvassed. In summary, the discretionary capacity of the Centrelink social workers to moderate or shape the impact of policy on income security recipients is steadily eroding as this group of professionals is increasingly captured by the emerging practices of workfare.     

Social Victimization Trajectories From Middle Childhood Through Late Adolescence

Social victimization refers to being targeted by behaviors intended to harm one's social status or relationships (Underwood, 2003), including malicious gossip, friendship manipulation, and social exclusion (both verbal and non‐verbal). The current study examined social victimization experiences longitudinally from middle childhood through late adolescence. Participants (N = 273, 139 females) reported on their social victimization experiences in grades 4–11 (ages 9 to 16 years). Using mixture (group‐based) modeling, four social victimization trajectories were identified: low, medium decreasing, medium increasing, and elevated. High parent‐child relationship quality decreased the odds of being in the elevated group compared to the low group; however, parent‐child relationship quality was no longer a significant predictor when emotional dysfunction was added to the model. Higher emotional dysfunction and male gender increased the odds of being in the elevated group and medium increaser group relative to the low group even after controlling for parent‐child relationship quality. Implications for intervention and future research directions are discussed.     

'Mingling together': promoting the social inclusion of disabled children and young people during the school holidays

The promotion of social inclusion of disabled children and their families is currently high on the UK political agenda. Research shows that disabled children and their families are highly disadvantaged, both economically and socially. This paper reports some of the findings of a qualitative study, entitled On Holiday! , which involved analysing the views of 297 people across six local authority research sites in England including 86 disabled children and young people. The study showed that many disabled children and their families experienced high levels of social isolation and exclusion during out-of-school periods and during the school holidays in particular. The paper recounts some of the experiences of disabled young people and their families and ways in which local authorities can promote their social inclusion. We argue that disabled young people and their families can only be truly socially included and empowered when all levels of the local authority (managers, officers and elected members) recognize the rights and entitlements of disabled children and have the political will and commitment to implement them.     

Intensity and persistence of individuals' social exclusion in Australia

We construct a measure of social exclusion that recognises its multidimensionality at the individual level, including its potential variability in intensity at a point in time and in persistence over time. We distinguish seven dimensions or domains of social exclusion: material resources; employment; education and skills; health and disability; social; community; and personal safety. For each of these seven domains, several indicators of social exclusion are produced. Our exclusion measure identifies 20 to 30 per cent of the Australian population aged 15 years and over as experiencing ‘marginal’ or worse levels of exclusion at any given point in time. However, there is considerable variation in both the extent and persistence of exclusion among the excluded. We further find that, although there are commonalities in the demographic composition of the socially excluded and the income poor, there are also some important differences. For example, persons 65 years and over represent a much smaller share of the most ‘excluded’ group than they do of the ‘poorest‘; and – adopting a household‐level measure of exclusion – children represent a larger share of the excluded than they do of the poor.     

Working the ‘spaces’ between policy and practice: the contributions offered by resilience theory and action research

The policy‐practice dimension often presents challenges particularly in the policy arena of child well‐being. Policy designers identify risk factors and design programmes intended to develop protective factors in areas of need. The 2004 Australian Communities for Children (CfC) initiative aimed to improve the social, health and educational outcomes for young children living in socio‐economically disadvantaged localities. Its method was to engage local community members to contribute towards developing protective factors. Rather than considering this national–local arrangement, an unworkable alliance, we examine the performance of CfC through three examples and demonstrate how resilience theory and action research can assist this programme achieve its social inclusion aims and well‐being outcomes. We choose not to disregard policy programmes like CfC, rather we emphasize the possibilities offered when working these complex spaces involving multiple and inherent contradictions. The spaces that often exist between the policy and its implementation are rethought to allow a greater opportunity for the growth of innovation and change.