by Christa Freiler

After two years of study and exploration, the Laidlaw Foundation last year adopted social inclusion as the strategic and conceptual focus of its Children's Agenda funding program. Social inclusion is the logical successor to the Foundation's Children at Risk (CAR) program which provided support for Campaign 2000 and The Progress of Canada's Children. The CAR program helped create positive perspectives on child well-being, it identified key public policies and community practices needed to ensure that all children flourished, and it moved public policy from a "casualty" approach to children's well-being to a focus on strengths, assets, and capabilities.

Social inclusion moves us even further – from a "risk orientation" to a human development approach; from a focus on marginalization and targeting to a struggle for solidarity and universality; from a concern with bringing "outsiders" or the marginalized "in" to an examination of what people are being included into.

The policy interest in social inclusion originated in Europe where it was limited to the presence of adults in the labour market. The Laidlaw Foundation's understanding is both different and deeper – we see social inclusion as the contemporary lens through which to understand social well-being, equality, and citizenship. Recognition is central to this new understanding, as are earlier notions of social and economic proximity.

There are different perspectives on the meaning and power of social inclusion. Some people see the central question as: Does social inclusion help create a level playing field so that all may play, or are we talking about changing the rules of the game? We believe it is both. Similarly, does social inclusion promote the valued recognition of diversity and differences, or does it focus on the commonalities of people's experiences and aspirations – as parents, workers, and neighbours? Again, we believe it is both. Finally, is social inclusion merely a new "spin" or is it a new way of thinking and acting?

Translating new thinking into new action

These were the questions posed in November 2001 at a national conference co-sponsored by the Laidlaw Foundation and the Canadian Council on Social Development. The meeting challenged participants to consider whether social inclusion leads to a new way of thinking and acting. From those discussions, important perspectives emerged. For example:

• Social inclusion can be considered a new way of thinking if it "inspires us to devise new approaches to tackling complex social and economic problems." It can make a significant contribution at three levels: a) legislative: a rights agenda can set a strong foundation, but we also need a relationship agenda; b) policy: it can serve as a lens or screen for assessing policy decisions; and c) process: it can help ensure true citizen engagement, not just five-minute consultations (from Sherri Torjman, Caledon Institute on Social Policy).
• Social inclusion is multi-layered and complex. It holds out the promise of a more just society, but first we need to know what "kind of inclusion is intended? Inclusion into what?" Whether social inclusion translates into a new way of acting depends on whether we see the presence of the marginalized resulting from deficient or unsound structural arrangements or a problem of process or access, where the structural arrangements are basically sound (Marvyn Novick, Ryerson University).¹

What does social inclusion depend on?

Social inclusion is a complex and challenging concept that cannot be reduced to only one dimension or meaning. Through a series of commissioned papers,² two national conferences and country-wide community soundings, we have found considerable agreement that social inclusion depends on the following:

Valued recognition – Conferring recognition and respect on individuals and groups. For example, policies and programs that recognize the differences in children's development and do not equate disability with pathology; support for community schools that are sensitive to cultural and gender differences.

Opportunities for human development – Nurturing the talents, skills, capacities and choices of children and adults to live a life they value and to make contributions both they and others find worthwhile. For example, ensuring learning and developmental opportunities for all children and adults; community child care and recreational programs for children that are growth-promoting and challenging rather than merely custodial.

Involvement and engagement – Having the right and necessary supports to make or be involved in decisions affecting oneself, family and community, and to be engaged in community life. For example, youth engagement and control of services for youth; parental input into school curriculum or placement decisions affecting their children; citizen engagement in municipal policy decisions; and political participation.

Proximity - Sharing physical and social spaces to provide opportunities for interactions, if desired, and to reduce social distances between people. For example, shared public spaces such as parks and libraries; mixed-income neighbourhoods and housing; integrated schools and classrooms; and decent public transit.

Material well-being – Having the material resources to allow children and their parents to participate fully in community life. This includes being safely and securely housed and having an adequate income.

What next?

A primary focus of the Laidlaw Foundation's program over the next few years is on building inclusive communities and cities. There is growing recognition that the well-being of children and families is closely tied to where they live, the quality of their neighbourhoods and cities, and the "social commons" where people interact and share experiences. Social inclusion adds an important dimension to the growing interest in a "new deal for cities." (The article by Clutterbuck and Novick elsewhere in this issue of Perception describes the Laidlaw Foundation's partnership with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the important work that is producing.)

In conclusion, social inclusion has tremendous potential to inform a transformative policy agenda at both the civic and national levels. It provides us with the opportunity to explore and implement new ways of advancing individual and collective well-being. We must not squander this opportunity by simply using 'social inclusion' as new packaging to justify the 'same old' public policies and community practices.

Notes

¹From the focus statement prepared for the November 2001 conference, Social Inclusion: A New Way of Thinking? For more information, visit www.ccsd.ca.

²The 12 working papers in the series, Perspectives on Social Inclusion, can be downloaded from the Laidlaw Foundation’s website at www.laidlawfdn.org or purchased from workingpapers@laidlawfdn.org.

Christa Freiler is the Children's Agenda Program Coordinator with the Laidlaw Foundation.
She can be reached at 416 964 3614 (Laidlaw office) or 416 604 1869 or cfreiler@sympatico.ca

Canadian Council on Social Development, 190 O'Connor Street, Suite 100, Ottawa, Ontario, K2P 2R3