Does+popularity+lead+to+exclusion?

The concept does not describe a new reality; neither is it is the only appropriate or even a radically innovative concept to describe deprivation. The concept’s advantage is that it focuses attention on central aspects of deprivation: deprivation is  a multi-dimensional phenomenon, and deprivation is part and parcel of social relations. The concept of social exclusion can help to ground the understanding of deprivation firmly in traditions of social science analyses. The concept has rapidly entered debates on deprivation and policies that combat deprivation. The first section briefly reviews this ascent, and discusses some of the uses of the concept. The second section aims to clear up some of the confusions around the concept. This paper was initially prepared for the World Development Report 2001 Forum on ‘Inclusion, Justice, and Poverty Reduction’. It is the result of the work done at the Poverty Research Unit, University of Sussex. This was mainly conceptual, in the context of comparing deprivation in North and South (see further the January  1998 IDS Bulletin).backgrounds — this is perhaps inadequately discussed in this paper. My argument implies a plea for widening economists’ understanding of exclusion beyond analysis of income and productivity. Particularly the work by Silver (discussed below) shows how much such understanding can depends on analysts’ backgrounds and political traditions.compares the concept with the notion of poverty, and its various definitions, emphasising overlaps as well as differences. The fourth section argues that social exclusion can be measured but that the type of research is likely to be different from the measurement of income poverty. The fifth section discusses the policies in which social exclusion has been central, particularly in France and more recently in Britain, and the policies in developing countries that operate with similar understandings of poverty. Section six concludes, and points at ways in which work on social exclusion can be taken forward. The history of the concept The invention of the term social exclusion is usually attributed to Rene Lenoir, then Secrétaire d’Etàt a l’Action Sociale in the Chirac government, who published = = Lenoir’s excluded included a wide variety of people: not only the poor, but also handicapped, suicidal and aged people, abused children, substance abusers, etc. – about 10 per cent of the French population. The term gained popularity in France during the 1980s (Silver 1994), the period of economic crisis and restructuring, the crisis of the welfare state, and various social and political crises. The term exclusion was used to refer to various types of social disadvantage, related to the new social problems that arose: unemployment, ghettoisation and fundamental changes in family life (Cannan 1997). Old welfare state provisions were thought incapable of dealing with these problems, and new social policies were developed. The popularity of the new term was partly the result of the unpopularity in France of the (British) concept of ‘poverty’. This was discredited because of its association with Christian charity, the =// ancien regime //= , and utilitarian liberalism. French Republicans have rejected both liberal individualism and socialism in favour of the idea of ‘solidarity’, and the welfare state was justified as a means of furthering social integration. Correspondingly, social exclusion was defined as a rupture of the social fabric, and attributed to a failure of the state. The concept has since gained popularity in other countries (Silver, 1998: 53ff.). The EU has been committed to fighting social exclusion throughout the past decade. The Maastricht and Amsterdam treaties and the Structural Funds included a commitment to combat social exclusion. The change in terminology in the anti-poverty programmes was significant: while ‘poverty’ was a central concern in the first programme, in the third programme this had become ‘social exclusion’. The EU induced new thinking on the nature of urban poverty and integrated, participatory strategies of  regeneration. Recently social exclusion also has become central to British policies and debates. During the Conservative government the notion did not enter policy debates. However, it was taken up in research – though the French meaning of the term was perhaps not always properly understood. In 1992 the Economic and Social Science Research Council (ESRC) commissioned Jordan (1996) to review research on poverty and social exclusion, and it became an ESRC ‘thematic priority’ in 1995. But the debate became dominated by the New Labour government’s initiative to establish an  interdepartmental Social Exclusion Unit in late 1997. The unit produced three reports, on neighbourhood renewal, on rough sleeping, and truancy and school exclusion. It is currently (at the time of writing) engaged in an assessment of 16-18 year olds not in  education, and consultation about teenage parenthood and how to reduce its rate. The way in which the concept has been used across Europe differs significantly. The British use of the term seems strongly rooted in – in terms of Silver’s paradigms, discussed below – an Anglo-Saxon liberal individualism. = Despite the adoption of the French term, = The Social Exclusion Unit is an example of the British Government’s ‘joinedup’ policy making. Though the notion of social exclusion rapidly came to occupy center stage, it should also be noted that it linked well with other developments and innovations that had been going on in the UK for some time (Parkinson 1998). Lister (1998) emphasises the influence of the US on current British social policy debates. Powell (1995: 28-29), writing on Ireland, notes: ‘attitudes towards poverty have fundamentally changed in postmodern society, redefining citizenship in terms American models of welfare reform seem to have been more influential in the British social policy debates. The French notion, particularly with the left-wing government, remains based more strongly in a national solidarity paradigm. The notion has so far found limited entry into development studies debates. ILO work so far has produced the only significant output of research in which the notion has been central. But the concept has met with a degree of (healthy) scepticism. Else Oyen for example believes that researchers ‘pick up the concept and are now running all over the place arranging seminars and conferences to find a researchable content in an umbrella concept for which there is limited theoretical underpinning’ . And though not always so  strongly stated, similar opinions have been expressed on many occasions. I believe that the concept has the potential to provide useful insights into the debate, and will try to argue this below; first, however, I will try to clarify some conceptual misunderstandings. Defining social exclusion There is an ‘official’ French definition of the concept, which defines social exclusion as a =exclusion is defined as the opposite of social integration, mirroring= the perceived importance of being part of society, of being ‘included’. The concept has two main defining characteristics. First, it is a multi-dimensional concept. People may be excluded, for example, from livelihoods, employment, earnings, property, housing, minimum consumption, education, the welfare state, citizenship, personal contacts or respect (Silver 1994). But the concept focuses on the multi-dimensionality of deprivation, on the fact that people are often deprived of different things at the same time. It refers to exclusion (deprivation) in the economic, social and political sphere. Second – less discussed in the literature but perhaps more relevant for the theoretical contribution of the concept – social exclusion implies a focus on the relations and processes that cause deprivation. People can be excluded by many different sorts of groups, often at the same time: landlords exclude people from access to land or housing; elite political groups exclude others from legal rights; priests in India may exclude scheduled castes from access to temples; minorities may be excluded from expressing their identity; labour markets, and also some trade unions exclude people (non-members) from getting jobs; and so on. Exclusion happens at each level of society. Group formation is a fundamental characteristic of human society, and this is accompanied by the exclusion of others. The concept takes us beyond mere descriptions of deprivation, and focuses attention on social relations and the processes and institutions that underlie and are part and parcel of deprivation. European Foundation (1995: 4). For the British Social Exclusion Unit, according to Carey Oppenheim, in April 1998 the establishment of a working definition was still a key challenge 1 April 1998). For the EU’s Economic and  Social Committee on the cost of poverty and social exclusion in Europe (1998),  ‘complete social exclusion’ is the ‘final culmination of a series of specific  exclusions from basic rights’.  The disadvantages faced by the excluded tend to be interrelated.  People belonging to minorities or school drop-outs may have a  greater risk of being unemployed or be employed in precarious  jobs and hence be low-paid, less-educated, recipients of social  assistance, possess little political power, and fewer social contacts.  Research on social exclusion focuses on the extent to which these  dimensions overlap. Which of these dimensions is central is  dependent on the context. The concept of social exclusion provides  the basis for context-specific analyses, and can allow definitions of  integration to be contested. ,

helium.com =Sinthesize= =Sometimes when children are called as popular and unpopular, exclusion happens when doing group for games, works etc. Those "unpopulars" don't get a group; sometimes they stay alone, and nobody does a group with them because they are afraid to become unpopular, or even, they don't now each other but they believe what people say.= ==‍Experts say that populars are popular because they need attention, and unpopulars are more independent. When some kid is popular he of her has constant attention and they get used to it, so when they have to be alone it is too hard for them. So, it does lead to exclusion, and sometimes when exclusion is severe the consequences may be suicide or death.== ==‍Eventhough that people know that popularity is a severe issue, they don't do anything, or they do a minimum effort to stop the problem. Teachers have tried to stop the problems that popularity causes, but the dessition to stop it is in our hands, the students.== ===‍Sofia Rincon 6B===