Youth, Sport and the Social Inclusion Agenda

The purpose of this paper is to assess aspects of the British Government's attempts to use sporting participation as a vehicle to re-integrate socially disadvantaged, excluded and 'at-risk' youth into mainstream society. A number of organisations, policy-makers, commentators, and practitioners with a stake in the 'sport and social inclusion agenda' were interviewed. General agreement was found on a number of points: that the field was overly crowded with policies, programmes and initiatives; that the field worked in a 'bottom-up' way, with the most significant factor determining success being effective local workers with good networks and cultural access; that the dichotomising rhetoric of inclusion/exclusion was counter-productive; that the notion of the 'at-risk youth' was problematic and unhelpful; and that they all now dealt with a marketplace, where 'clients' had to be enrolled in their own reformation. There was also disagreement on a number of points: that policy acts as a relatively accurate template for practice, as opposed to the argument that it was simply regarded as a cluster of suggestions for practice; that policy was exceptionally piecemeal in its formulation and application, as opposed to regarding policy as necessarily targeted and dispersed; and that the inclusion agenda was largely politically driven and transitory, as opposed to the optimistic view that it had become ingrained in local practice. Finally, the paper examines some issues that are the most likely points of contribution by researchers in the area: that more research needs to be done on the processes of identity formation associated with participation in sport; that more effective programme evaluation needs to be done for such forms of governmental intervention to work properly; and that the relationship between different kinds of physical activity and social and personal change needs to be more thoroughly theorised.

Charity law review and civil society : paving the way from alienation to social inclusion in Northern Ireland ; the resonance with experience in Australia

This paper considers the opportunity, presented by the forthcoming charity law review in Northern Ireland, for adjusting the charity law framework so as to focus charitable activity on the circumstances typical of societies in conflict or experiencing transition. This opportunity is one for broadening the definition of 'charitable purpose' to include activities directed towards forestalling alienation and facilitating social inclusion. It would include rehabilitating the victims of social confrontation and developing related services of advocacy, mediation and reconciliation. It argues that a creative response to this opportunity could address the current social inclusion agenda and thereby contribute to the consolidation of civil society in this jurisdiction. It suggests that the experience in Northern Ireland, as an exemplar of a society in transition, has a resonance with the experience in Australia. It further suggests that it could also have a relevance for approaching the management of tensions within or between nations where people may otherwise come to perceive themselves as alienated...

Does the social inclusion discourse add value?

The election of a national Labor Government in 2007 saw ‘social inclusion’ emerge as Australia’s overarching social policy agenda. Being ‘included’ has since been defined as being able to ‘have the resources, opportunities and capabilities needed to learn, work, engage and have a voice’. Various researchers have adopted the social inclusion concept to construct a multi-dimensional framework for measuring disadvantage, beyond poverty alleviation. This research program has enabled various forms of statistical modelling based on some agreement about what it means to be ‘included’ in society. At the same time it is acknowledged that social inclusion remains open and contestable and can be used in the name of both progressive and more punitive programs and policies. This ambiguity raises questions about whether the social inclusion framework, as it is presently defined, has the potential to be a progressive and transformative discourse. In this paper we examine whether the Australian social inclusion agenda has the capacity to address social inequality in a meaningful way, concluding with a discussion about the need to understand social inequality and social disadvantage in relational terms.

Promoting resilience and protective factors in the Children's Fund: supporting children and young people's pathways towards social inclusion?

As part of the broader prevention and social inclusion agenda, concepts of risk, resilience, and protective factors inform a range of U.K. Government initiatives targeted towards children and young people in England, including Sure Start, the Children's Fund, On Track, and Connexions. This paper is based on findings from a large qualitative dataset of interviews conducted with children and their parents or caregiver who accessed Children's Fund services as part of National Evaluation of the Children's Fund research.1 Drawing on the notion of young people's trajectories, the paper discusses how Children's Fund services support children's and young people's pathways towards greater social inclusion. While many services help to build resilience and protective factors for individual children, the paper considers the extent to which services also promote resilience within the domains of the family, school, and wider community and, hence, attempt to tackle the complex, multi-dimensional aspects of social exclusion affecting children, young people, and their families.

Neoliberal social inclusion? The agenda of the Australian Universities Community Engagement Alliance

University–community engagement (UCE) represents a hybrid discourse and a set of practices within contemporary higher education. As a modality of research and teaching, ‘engagement’ denotes the process of universities forming partnerships with external communities for the promised generation of mutually beneficial and socially responsive knowledge, leading to enhanced economic, social and cultural developments. A critical discourse analysis (Fairclough 2003. Analysing Discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge) of the Australian Universities Community Engagement Alliance’s (AUCEA) ‘Position Paper’(2008 Universities and community engagement (Position paper 2008–2010)), as reported in this article, suggests that its uneasy synthesis of neoliberal, social inclusion and civic engagement discourses into a hybrid UCE discourse semantically privileges neoliberal forms of engagement. Perhaps, as a result, the AUCEA seems to have missed an opportunity to influence the Australian ‘widening participation’ debate on securing access and opportunity for marginalised students at universities and building social and cultural capital within their communities of origin.

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.

Multiculturalism, education for sustainable development (ESD) and the shifting discursive landscape of social inclusion

Australia has a long and sometimes turbulent relationship with the migrant Other. This paper examines a component of this relationship via the window of contemporary multicultural policy. The paper begins with an analysis of the political and social conditions that enabled a national and bipartisan policy of multiculturalism to emerge as formalised federal policy during the late 1960s and early 1970s. The paper re-problematises the influences that helped shape Australia's articulation of race and ethnicity and argues that multiculturalism, within a post-September 11 environment, can no longer be framed solely within its traditional framework of social justice. The paper positions education for sustainable development (ESD) as an emerging discursive field that provides educators with an alternative road map for critiquing Australia's fluid relationship with the migrant Other. By linking the tenets of multiculturalism with ESD, this paper suggests pre-service teacher educators are presented with a productive, and at the same time politically palatable, means for regaining pedagogical traction for a semi-dormant agenda of social inclusion.

Community Cohesion and Social Inclusion: Unravelling a Complex Relationship

In a global context of an emphasis on identity politics and a ‘cultural turn’ in social analysis, deep concern has been expressed about multiethnic Britain becoming a broken society with many ‘sleepwalking’ into segregation and separatism. Given the close correspondence between areas of acute ethnic segregation and those of multiple deprivation, intercommunal tensions have included disputes about the equitable allocation of scarce urban resources across ethnicity. This creates the possibility that urban programmes may inadvertently accentuate intercommunal tension and confound efforts to synchronise cohesion and inclusion agendas. Following recent debates about the implications of increased diversity, influenced by arguments that multiculturalism has encouraged ‘parallel lives’, an emergent policy framework emphasises more proactive integration to promote ‘common belonging’. Criticism of this agenda includes its confusion between community and social cohesion, and its disproportionate focus on cultural aspects such as identity formation and recognition, relative to structural issues of income and class. In exploring this contested terrain in Britain, the article suggests that the longer-term debate about segregation, deprivation and community differentials in Northern Ireland can offer useful insight for Britain’s policy discourse.

Towards the social inclusion of youth: Tools for analysis and policy design

The integration of youth into development processes is crucial in order to advance towards more egalitarian societies. Over the past few years, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) has regarded equality as the horizon for development, structural change as the way to achieve it, and policy as the instrument to reach that horizon. Equality is viewed as going beyond the distribution of means, such as monetary income, to include equal opportunities and capacities. This implies understanding equality as the full exercise of citizenship, with dignity and the reciprocal recognition of actors. Progress in this direction requires policies that promote the autonomy of subjects and pay attention to their vulnerabilities.

Longing to belong : social inclusion and wellbeing among youth with refugee backgrounds in the first three years in Melbourne, Australia

For young people with refugee backgrounds, establishing a sense of belonging to their family and community, and to their country of resettlement is essential for wellbeing. This paper describes the psychosocial factors associated with subjective health and wellbeing outcomes among a cohort of 97 refugee youth (aged 11-19) during their first three years in Melbourne, Australia. The findings reported here are drawn from the Good Starts Study, a longitudinal investigation of settlement and wellbeing among refugee youth conducted between 2004 and 2008. The overall aim of Good Starts was to identify the psychosocial factors that assist youth with refugee backgrounds in making a good start in their new country. A particular focus was on key transitions: from pre-arrival to Australia, from the language school to mainstream school, and from mainstream school to higher education or to the workforce. Good Starts used a mix of both method and theory from anthropology and social epidemiology. Using standardized measures of wellbeing and generalised estimating equations to model the predictors of wellbeing over time, this paper reports that key factors strongly associated with wellbeing outcomes are those that can be described as indicators of belonging e the most important being subjective social status in the broader Australian community, perceived discrimination and bullying. We argue that settlement specific policies and programs can ultimately be effective if embedded within a broader socially inclusive society - one that offers real opportunities for youth with refugee backgrounds to flourish.

Social inclusion through community enterprise? Examining the available evidence

In recent years the concepts of social inclusion and exclusion have become part of the repertoire of third-way policy discourses that seek to respond to complex socioeconomic problems through processes of 'joined-up' and 'integrated' governance. As part of this approach, we are witnessing an increased focus on the role of the third sector in facilitating social inclusion. While the push towards governing through networks has gained moral legitimacy in some areas of social policy, the practical legitimacy - that is, whether these new approaches actually produce demonstrably better outcomes than more traditional policy approaches - remains largely unsubstantiated. This article contributes to the evidence base, by examining the social-inclusion impacts of eleven community enterprises operating in Victoria, and to the wider available evidence on the social, economic and civic effects of social enterprise.

Justice and social inclusion policies

Since 2008 the social policy of Australia’s Labor government (in office since 2007) has been framed by a commitment to ‘social inclusion’. In this respect Australia belatedly aligned itself with policy imaginaries already widely, if variably, adopted in Europe (Atkinson & Davoudi 2000; Levitas et al 2007; Buckmaster & Thomas 2009). This framework has been self-consciously identified as what Labor governments are equipped to do. Framed by the post-2007 global financial crisis and agreeing with claims that ‘excessive greed’ and irresponsibility on the part of financial markets sponsored that calamity, the Labor government vigorously promoted its ‘social democratic’ credentials. Former Prime Minister Rudd has explained this meant that Australia would no longer adopt a neo-liberal orientation promoting unrestrained capitalism (Rudd 2009).