This article was downloaded by: [Florida Atlantic University]

On: 20 November 2014, At: 08:10

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Development in Practice
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cdip20

Amartya K. Sen and social exclusion

a
Ann Nevile
a
Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government, The
Australian National University , Canberra, ACT, 0200, Australia E-
mail:
Published online: 22 Nov 2007.

To cite this article: Ann Nevile (2007) Amartya K. Sen and social exclusion, Development in
Practice, 17:2, 249-255, DOI: 10.1080/09614520701197200

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09614520701197200

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Development in Practice, Volume 17, Number 2, April 2007

VIEWPOINT
Amartya K. Sen and social exclusion

Ann Nevile
Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 08:10 20 November 2014

Andries Du Toit (2004) argues that the concept of social exclusion has limited use in the field of
development studies, since chronic poverty is often the result of incorporation on particularly
disadvantageous terms (‘adverse incorporation’) rather than any process of exclusion. Du Toit
therefore advocates going beyond thinking about ‘exclusion’ and ‘inclusion’ in binary terms
and looking more closely at how different kinds of power are formed and maintained. This
article argues that thinking about social exclusion has already moved beyond a simple
‘included/excluded’ dichotomy, and that use of Sen’s analytical framework assists researchers
to tease out the complex, interconnected factors underlying chronic poverty, such as that
experienced by agricultural workers in South Africa’s Western Cape district of Ceres.

KEY WORDS : Civil Society; Gender and Diversity; Labour and Livelihoods; Rights

Introduction
The concept of social exclusion is a relatively recent import into the field of development
studies, and debate continues about its usefulness. Some development academics believe that
the concept of social exclusion is useful because the emphasis on the social and economic pro-
cesses that create exclusion helps academics and policy makers to better understand the causes
and consequences of exclusion and deprivation. This in turn opens up new possibilities in terms
of policy interventions (see, for example, de Haan 1998:11; Gore 1995:8; Sen 2000: 45– 7).
Rodgers (1995: 51) notes that an emphasis on process is particularly important for development
academics concerned with links between deprivation and development:

Particular patterns of development may have exclusion built into them, in that economic growth
is concentrated in particular regions or groups, the gains are captured by national or inter-
national elites [and] the need for cheap and docile labour leads to the suppression of rights.

Critics of the concept, such as Du Toit, argue that it has limited use in situations where chronic
poverty is often the result of incorporation on particularly disadvantageous terms (‘adverse
incorporation’) rather than any process of exclusion. Du Toit (2004: 987– 8) therefore calls for

. . .a move beyond the simple counter-positions of ‘exclusion’ and ‘inclusion’ and . . . the
use of concepts that allow a much more sensitive analysis of the links between livelihood
dynamics and the broader discursive, social and spatial formations of power.

ISSN 0961-4524 Print=ISSN 1364-9213 Online 020249-7 # 2007 Oxfam GB 249

Routledge Publishing DOI: 10.1080=09614520701197200
 Ann Nevile

I believe that the concept of social exclusion can add value to analyses of poverty in developing
countries if researchers make full use of existing analytical resources, in particular the
analytical framework put forward by Amartya K. Sen in his paper, ‘Social Exclusion:
Concept, Application and Scrutiny’ (Sen 2000).

Sen’s analytical framework

Sen (2000: 8) believes the concept of social exclusion is useful because of its emphasis on the
role of relational issues in deprivation. He then goes further, arguing that it is important to dis-
tinguish between exclusion which is in itself a deprivation (that is, the exclusion has constitutive
relevance) and exclusion which is not in itself negative, but which can lead to other deprivations
which do have constitutive relevance. Sen (op. cit.: 13) cites landlessness and lack of access to
the credit market as examples of this latter type of exclusion, which have what he calls ‘instru-
Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 08:10 20 November 2014

mental importance’. That is, landlessness or not having access to the credit market may not be
impoverishing in themselves, but may lead to other deprivations (such as income poverty)
through causal consequences, such as the inability to take advantage of income-generating
activities that require collateral or an initial investment and use of credit (ibid.).
Elaborating the causal chain in this way elucidates the processes that lead to poverty and
social exclusion. This type of causal analysis is further enhanced by distinguishing between
active and passive exclusion. According to Sen (op. cit.:15), active exclusion is the result of
a deliberate policy to exclude certain people from particular opportunities. The Australian
government’s decision to deny certain categories of refugee access to a range of benefits and
social welfare programmes is an obvious example of active exclusion. On the other hand,
passive exclusion occurs when ‘there is no deliberate attempt to exclude’. Deprivation is the
unintended result of social processes or policy decisions, as for example when economic
restructuring results in increases in unemployment in certain sections of society (ibid.).
However, Sen warns against trying to explain all cases of capability deprivation in terms of
exclusion:
Many problems of deprivation arise from unfavourable terms of inclusion and adverse
participation. . . [It is] very important to distinguish between the nature of a problem
where some people are being kept out (or at least left out) and the characteristics of a
different problem where some people are being included – may even be forced to be
included – on deeply unfavourable terms. (Sen 2000: 28-9, emphasis in original)
In other words, an individual’s failure to obtain adequate basic capabilities can have diverse
origins, encompassing unfavourable inclusion as well as exclusion (op. cit.: 29).
The concept of social exclusion has been criticised because it obscures the way in which
mainstream processes and institutions create or exacerbate capability deprivation (see, for
example, Atkinson 2000; Geddes 2000; Green and Hulme 2005; Levitas 1998). I would
argue that this problem can be avoided through use of the analytical framework briefly outlined
above. This proposition is tested by applying Sen’s analytical framework to the case presented
in Du Toit’s article.

Constitutive or instrumental?
As noted earlier, the concept of social exclusion focuses attention on the processes that cause
capability deprivation. Factors such as inequality and relational poverty; exclusion from the
labour market, the credit market, or health care; gender-related exclusions and inequality;
and food-market poverty can all cause capability deprivation (Sen 2000: 40– 4).1 This list is

250 Development in Practice, Volume 17, Number 2, April 2007

 Amartya K. Sen and social exclusion

not exhaustive, with other academics identifying exclusion from political engagement as an
important dimension of social exclusion (see, for example, Burchardt et al. 2002: 30). Of the
seven factors listed above, five are clearly relevant to the situation in Ceres, in the Western
Cape district of South Africa: inequality and relational poverty; exclusion from the credit
market; food-market poverty; exclusion from political engagement; and gender-related
inequalities. The labour market is also an important factor, but in this instance the problem
is one of unfavourable inclusion rather than exclusion.
Inequality and relational poverty occur when an individual is unable to take part in the normal
life of the community because, as Adam Smith put it, the individual is unable ‘to appear in
public without shame’ (Sen 2000: 4). Inequality and relational poverty are clearly a reality
for agricultural workers in Ceres, who are marginalised by their inability to ‘participate fully
in a society in which acts and practices of consumption are given increasing cultural and
material centrality’ (Du Toit 2004: 999).
Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 08:10 20 November 2014

Agricultural workers in Ceres are also excluded from the credit market. ‘Respondents
reported very little direct access to the resources necessary for . . . independent entrepreneurial
activity’ (Du Toit 2004: 996). In addition, many experience food-market poverty because they
lack the resources necessary to grow their own food, and at times do not have sufficient cash
income to purchase food that is available in the market. For example, Du Toit (ibid.) reports
that even within the top income quintile, ‘almost 40 per cent of respondents reported at least
one hungry month, while half of the respondents in the sample reported going hungry for
half the year or more’.
Poverty among agricultural workers in Ceres is also characterised by exclusion from political
engagement, with poor households not participating in local or national decision making
(Du Toit 2004: 999):
Rather than acting collectively to address the underlying causes of poverty and
vulnerability, poor people in Ceres relied on informal networks – family, friends and
employers – to tide them over when times were hard. (Du Toit 2004: 998-9)
This reliance on informal social support is one reason why poor households in Ceres can be said
to experience gender-related inequalities. As is often the case, the burden of maintaining the
informal social supports necessary for day-to-day survival is borne ‘almost exclusively by
women’ (op. cit.: 997). Furthermore, certain gender-related inequalities are linked to racial
inequalities, with the permanent agricultural workforce being predominantly male and
coloured, while the seasonal or contract workforce is mostly female and African (op. cit.: 995).
So far we have been discussing examples of exclusion, but, in the case of the labour market,
capability deprivation is caused by unfavourable inclusion rather than exclusion. As Du Toit
(op. cit.: 994) explains, agriculture in the Western Cape has undergone a loss of permanent
employment and an increase in contract labour provided by third parties. For example,
58 per cent of farms surveyed had reduced their permanent workforce, with 47 per cent planning
reductions or further reductions (ibid.). Furthermore, much of the contract work is seasonal, and
wages are low. For example, 16 per cent of households relied on work packing food and veg-
etables, which is only available during the summer (op. cit.: 996). Consequently, ‘the agricul-
tural labour market is not sufficient to sustain adequate livelihoods. . .More than four-fifths of
respondents . . . reported household incomes below the poverty line’ (ibid.).
While Sen (2000) confined his discussion of constitutive and instrumental relevance to cases
of exclusion, there is no reason why the distinction cannot also be made in cases of unfavour-
able inclusion. Thus, food-market poverty, inequality and relational poverty, and gender- and
race-related inequalities have constitutive importance, because exclusion from the normal life
of the community and the inability to feed oneself are deprivations in themselves. Inequalities

Development in Practice, Volume 17, Number 2, April 2007 251

 Ann Nevile

that relate to gender and race also have constitutive importance, because the inequalities restrict
the capability of women, in particular African women, to enjoy the kind of life they value. In
addition to constitutive importance, food-market poverty may also have instrumental import-
ance if inability to purchase food restricts an individual’s ability to participate in the normal
life of the community, as would be the case if custom required a display of hospitality.
Exclusion from the credit market and political engagement, and unfavourable inclusion in the
labour market, all have instrumental importance. Exclusion from the credit market restricts an
individual’s capacity to take advantage of additional income-earning opportunities, thereby
contributing to food-market poverty and making unfavourable inclusion in the labour market
more likely, as does exclusion from political engagement. Unfavourable inclusion in the
labour market has instrumental importance, because it is the primary cause of food-market
poverty. Thus the chronic poverty experienced by agricultural workers in Ceres can be said
to be characterised by a combination of inequality and relational poverty, gender- and race-
Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 08:10 20 November 2014

related inequality, and food-market poverty. The primary cause of food-market poverty is
unfavourable inclusion (or adverse incorporation, to use Du Toit’s term) into the labour
market, reinforced by a lack of access to the credit market and exclusion from political
engagement.
So far, Sen’s analytical framework has been sufficient to capture the complexity of the
situation facing agricultural workers in Ceres. The focus of the following section is on active
and passive forms of exclusion and unfavourable inclusion – an analytical distinction that is
important both in policy terms and for illuminating the way in which mainstream processes
and institutions create or exacerbate capability deprivation.

Active or passive?
As noted previously, agricultural workers in Ceres experience food-market poverty, the primary
cause of which is unfavourable inclusion in the labour market, reinforced by exclusion from
political engagement. This section examines the extent to which these factors are the result
of policies or decisions that are intended to produce exclusion or unfavourable inclusion, or
are the unintended consequence of other unrelated policy decisions.
Using this framework to analyse the situation facing agricultural workers in Ceres reveals
that passive exclusion and unfavourable inclusion occur as a result of national and international
policy decisions or trends; whereas at the local level, exclusion and unfavourable inclusion are
active. As Du Toit (2004: 994) explains, over the last 15 years agriculture in South Africa has
been subject to a number of structural changes, such as the dismantling of the regulatory frame-
work that had previously restricted competition in the sector, a strengthening of social and
labour rights, and an increase in the power of buyers over other actors in the agro-commodity
export sector. As a result of these structural changes, farmers face ‘higher barriers to entry,
stiffer competition and greater risk. . . [as well as] increased direct and indirect costs caused
by greater labour and social regulation’ (ibid.). In responding to these pressures, many
farmers restructured their business, replacing permanent employees with casual and seasonal
labour and, at the same time, reducing or abandoning the provision of non-monetary benefits
(such as tied housing) previously provided to farm workers (ibid.).
Clearly, policy reforms at the national and international levels, such as the deregulation of the
agriculture sector or international agro-food restructuring, were not designed to produce
unfavourable inclusion into the labour market. On the other hand, local-level responses can
be regarded as an active form of unfavourable inclusion. Du Toit (2004: 994) notes that
‘fruit and wine farmers, although exposed to increasing pressures, were still largely able to
choose how to respond’, and many chose to reduce their own exposure to risk while increasing

252 Development in Practice, Volume 17, Number 2, April 2007

 Amartya K. Sen and social exclusion

that of their workers. Similarly, the low wages of agricultural workers were not deliberately
designed so that individuals could not afford to buy food, but actions taken at the local level
can be seen as active forms of unfavourable inclusion, in that workers were not compensated
with higher wages for the removal of benefits such as tied housing.
In the past, non-white South Africans were actively excluded from the political process.
While the political exclusion currently experienced by agricultural workers in Ceres cannot
be divorced from past practice, political exclusion at the national level can now be characterised
as passive rather than active. That is, government policy no longer prevents political partici-
pation, but current practices do not encourage or facilitate involvement in the political
process. Because the national government has its power base in urban rather than rural areas,
it is not sensitive to the concerns of the rural poor, a situation that does not encourage political
participation among a group of people with no history of political engagement (Du Toit 2004:
991 and 999).
Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 08:10 20 November 2014

In his analysis of the political marginalisation experienced by Scheduled Tribe women in

Mysore, India, Vijayalakshmi (2001: 20) argued that effective participation in the political
process is difficult, if not impossible, while these women continue to experience social and
economic exclusion. Vijayalakshmi’s analysis of the situation facing Scheduled Tribe
women also applies to agricultural workers in Ceres. Unfavourably included in economic
and social domains, poor agricultural workers are forced to form alliances with powerful
patrons in order to survive. These patron –client relationships affect political engagement,
because they make the poor politically passive and averse to confrontation (Du Toit 2004:
998). Thus, local practices and informal social processes can be seen as active forms of exclusion.
For example, Du Toit (ibid.) notes that access to subsidised municipal services is (reportedly)
controlled by particular local government officials. Controlling access to government services
in this way clearly discourages involvement in local-level decision making, because individuals
who have very limited resources cannot afford to risk offending one of these ‘gatekeepers’.
One criticism of social exclusion is that it diverts attention away from how mainstream insti-
tutions and processes create or exacerbate poverty. This in turn affects anti-poverty policies and
strategies. That is, poverty is regarded as a problem that can be fixed by integration into the
mainstream:
Like social exclusion discourse, policy debates in South Africa are shaped by an uncritical
acceptance of the assumption that the solution of problems depends on processes of
modernizing reform, job-creation and increased global integration. (Du Toit 2004:1006)
Asking the question is exclusion (or unfavourable inclusion) active or passive? forces the
researcher to consider the ways in which policies and practices at the international, national,
and local levels contribute to capability deprivation. As demonstrated in the analysis of the situ-
ation facing agricultural workers in Ceres, identifying active and passive forms of exclusion and
unfavourable inclusion highlights the fact that chronic poverty is the result of a combination of
deliberate choices by specific actors, and the unintended consequences of macro-level policy
decisions.

Conclusion
The concept of social exclusion has been criticised for offering little of substance beyond
simplistic distinctions between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ and, more importantly, for ignoring
the ways in which mainstream processes and institutions create or exacerbate poverty and
inequality. Any assessment of the usefulness of contested concepts such as social exclusion
needs to focus on whether or not the concept assists researchers to tease out the complex,

Development in Practice, Volume 17, Number 2, April 2007 253

 Ann Nevile

interconnected factors pertinent to particular experiences of chronic poverty. This article argues
that Sen’s view of social exclusion offers a number of important analytical distinctions which
assist researchers to do just that.
First, Sen takes poverty as the broader concept, with social exclusion being only one of a
number of reasons why an individual is unable to obtain adequate basic capabilities. Treating
social exclusion as a subset of poverty means that not everything has to be explained as some
form of exclusion. Rather, being open to the possibility that unfavourable inclusion may be an
important causal influence means that researchers are less likely to fall into the over-simplistic
included/excluded dichotomy rightly criticised by Du Toit (2004).
Second, the distinction drawn by Sen (2000) between forms of exclusion (or unfavourable
inclusion) which are in themselves a deprivation and those which are not necessarily negative
but which can lead to deprivation allows the researcher to elaborate the causal chain. This is an
important ability when analysing situations characterised by complex causal factors.
Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 08:10 20 November 2014

The third analytical distinction identified by Sen (2000) is that of active and passive forms of
exclusion (and unfavourable inclusion). As with the previous distinction between constitutive
and instrumental relevance, knowing whether the causal influence is the result of a deliberate
policy decision, or the unintended consequence of other policy decisions, is useful in deter-
mining an appropriate policy response. Identifying causal factors as active forms of exclusion
(or unfavourable inclusion) focuses attention on the reasons behind the deliberate decision to
exclude, thus allowing debate on whether the reasons for the exclusion are justified. Identifying
causal factors as passive forms of exclusion focuses attention on the ways in which the unin-
tended consequences can be ameliorated. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, distinguishing
between active and passive forms of exclusion forces the researcher to consider the ways in
which policies and practices at the international, national, and local levels contribute to
capability deprivation. In other words, it forces the researcher to consider the ways in which
mainstream processes and institutions create or exacerbate capability deprivation.
Effective policy responses depend on a deep understanding of the complex set of causal
influences at work in any particular situation. Sen’s analytical framework is not the only set
of conceptual tools available to researchers, but it is one which, to date, has not been widely
used. The analysis of the situation facing agricultural workers in Ceres, presented in this
article, suggests that the concept of social exclusion does have something to offer those
interested in the analysis of chronic poverty in developing societies – if a more sophisticated
use is made of existing analytical resources.

Note
1. For Sen (2000: 43), food-market poverty occurs when, although there is no shortage of food available
through the market, certain groups in society experience hunger because they are unable to purchase
sufficient food for themselves or their families.

References
Atkinson, Rob (2000) ‘Combating social exclusion in Europe: the new urban policy challenge’, Urban
Studies 37(5 – 6): 1037– 55.
Burchardt, Tania, Julian Le Grand and David Piachaud (2002) ‘Degrees of exclusion: developing a
dynamic, multidimensional measure’, in J. Hills, J. Le Grand and D. Piachaud (eds.) Understanding
Social Exclusion, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
de Haan, Arjan (1998) ‘Social exclusion: an alternative concept for the study of deprivation?’, IDS
Bulletin 29(1):10 – 19.

254 Development in Practice, Volume 17, Number 2, April 2007

 Amartya K. Sen and social exclusion

Du Toit, Andries (2004) ‘“Social exclusion” discourse and chronic poverty: A South African case study’,
Development and Change 35(5): 987– 1010.
Geddes, Mike (2000) ‘Tackling social exclusion in the European Union? The limits of the new orthodoxy
of local partnership’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 24(4): 782– 800.
Gore, Charles (1995) ‘Introduction: markets, citizenship and social exclusion’, in G. Rodgers, C. Gore,
and J. B. Figueiredo (eds.) Social Exclusion: Rhetoric, Reality, Responses, Geneva: International Institute
for Labour Studies and UNDP.
Green, Maia and David Hulme (2005) ‘From correlates and characteristics to causes: thinking about
poverty from a chronic poverty perspective’, World Development 33(6): 867– 79.
Levitas, Ruth (1998) The Inclusive Society? Social Exclusion and New Labour, London: Macmillan.
Rodgers, Gerry (1995) ‘What is special about a “social exclusion” approach?’, in G. Rodgers, C. Gore,
and J. B. Figueiredo (eds.) Social Exclusion: Rhetoric, Reality, Responses, Geneva: International Institute
for Labour Studies and UNDP.
Sen, Amartya (2000) Social Exclusion: Concept, Application and Scrutiny, Social Development Paper
Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 08:10 20 November 2014

No. 1, Manila: Asian Development Bank.

Vijayalakshmi, V. (2001) ‘Politics of Inclusion: Scheduled Tribe Women in Local Governance’, IESC
Working Paper 88, Bangalore: Institute for Social and Economic Change.

The author
Ann Nevile lectures in social policy at the Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government, Australian
National University. Contact details: Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government, The Australian
National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia. Email: Ann.Nevile@anu.edu.au.

Development in Practice, Volume 17, Number 2, April 2007 255