Social Entrepreneurship and Social Inclusion:

Processes, Practices, and Prospects 1st Edition

Rama Krishna Reddy Kummitha (Auth.) pdf download
https://textbookfull.com/product/social-entrepreneurship-and-social-inclusion-processes-practices-
and-prospects-1st-edition-rama-krishna-reddy-kummitha-auth/

★★★★★ 4.8/5.0 (35 reviews) ✓ 200 downloads ■ TOP RATED

"Perfect download, no issues at all. Highly recommend!" - Mike D.

DOWNLOAD EBOOK
 Social Entrepreneurship and Social Inclusion: Processes,
Practices, and Prospects 1st Edition Rama Krishna Reddy
Kummitha (Auth.) pdf download

TEXTBOOK EBOOK TEXTBOOK FULL

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide TextBook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Collection Highlights

Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook Loucas

Social Innovation and Social Entrepreneurship:

Fundamentals, Concepts, and Tools Luis Portales

Indian History Second Edition Krishna Reddy

The Holocaust and European Societies: Social Processes and

Social Dynamics 1st Edition Frank Bajohr
Social Entrepreneurship and Tourism Philosophy and
Practice 1st Edition Pauline J. Sheldon

Multicultural competence in student affairs advancing

social justice and inclusion Pope

Sustainable Environment and Infrastructure: Proceedings of

EGRWSE 2019 Krishna R. Reddy

Successful Educational Actions for Inclusion and Social

Cohesion in Europe 1st Edition Ramon Flecha

Young People and Social Control: Problems and Prospects

from the Margins 1st Edition Ross Deuchar
 Rama Krishna Reddy Kummitha

SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP
AND SOCIAL INCLUSION
Processes, Practices, and Prospects
Social Entrepreneurship and Social Inclusion
 Rama Krishna Reddy Kummitha

Social
Entrepreneurship and
Social Inclusion
Processes, Practices, and Prospects
Rama Krishna Reddy Kummitha
School of Management
Politecnico di Milano
Milano, Italy

ISBN 978-981-10-1614-1    ISBN 978-981-10-1615-8 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-1615-8

Library of Congress Control Number: 2016958290

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2017

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub-
lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.

Cover illustration: © Peerasith Chaisanit / Alamy Stock Photo

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company is 152 Beach Road, #22-06/08 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
To Barefoot winners
 Preface

In my earlier work Social Entrepreneurship: Working towards Greater

Inclusiveness, I carried out a multi-case analysis to understand how social
entrepreneurs achieve inclusive growth by initiating various innovative
experiments. While the book offered narratives about the positive social
change in multiple contexts, it warranted the need for a more nuanced
understanding of social entrepreneurship at the grassroots level, and the
conflicts and the interactions that exist among various stakeholders. Such
understanding is crucial due to the existence of conflicting local con-
texts, institutional identities and aims. Accordingly, the analysis in this
book relies on a single case to offer a deeper analysis of the “change”
process by highlighting the issues of embeddedness and community
participation.
The book takes stock of the relevant academic scholarship that exists
in the field of social entrepreneurship and offers a perspective in which
to understand its relevance and significance in a community context.
Building on the literature on social exclusion and social inclusion, this
book argues that social entrepreneurship is a phenomenal approach that
could bring excluded communities into the mainstream. Social exclusion
as a concept recently came into existence due to the failure of existing
institutions, including the state and the market, to protect the interests of
the population. Thus, it has been identified that “including” those who
have been excluded from the mainstream is considered a crucial act that
existing institutions, which talk about development, need to take up. It
is found that the existing systems in both the social and market context

vii
viii Preface

compromise social realities and most likely discourage distruptive innova-

tions at both the process and product or service development level, which
are crucial for achieving social inclusion.
However, civil society and its positive role in building inclusive societ-
ies has opened a space for enhanced expectations. The social innovations
adopted by these organisations time and again created the necessary sce-
narios for positive social change to roll. Social enterprise as an advanced
form of civil society organisation takes the credit to create necessary envi-
ronment to build inclusive societies. Taking inspiration from the author’s
field exposure, the book highlights various innovative approaches and
methods that social entrepreneurship as a practice adopts in order to build
a more robust social order.
While existing knowledge in social entrepreneurship has long
accepted and analysed the methods that social entrepreneurs adopt in
order to achieve the relevant social change, the book brings a novel
perspective to analyse how community participation and embedded-
ness offer necessary contexts. Based on field research, the book looks
in depth into a social enterprise for evidence to understand how social
entrepreneurship as a practice brings different segregated communities
on board and enriches their living conditions. As part of the embed-
dedness, it is found that social entrepreneurs as agents initially engage
themselves in the local cultures, known as structures, in order to gain the
necessary trust and recognition from the communities. After acquiring
this, the social enterprises run by the social entrepreneurs then moves
on to transform the local cultures where they are embedded in order to
make them holistic. The participation of communities in the process of
social entrepreneurship opens up new avenues for social entrepreneurs
to innovative and build robust systems as necessary.
The researcher interacted with communities who benefited from the
services offered by the social enterprise, and those who were provided
with jobs. The latter claimed to initially hail from the most excluded back-
grounds who found a way out from their deprivation due to the enhanced
skills, capabilities and financial freedoms they acquired as part of the jobs
they were provided with. It is also found that by employing community
members in various jobs roles, the organisation has, it created win-win
scenarios where communities gain through the provision of employment
and service, and the social enterprise benefits from the trust it created
among the communities. Communities who have been provided with
various services have also gained quite significantly by undertaking central
 Preface  ix

roles in their planning and execution. It is found that excluded community

members, especially women, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the
physically challenged have benefited in multiple ways. Social capital cre-
ated as part of the social entrepreneurial endeavour offers the necessary
mechanism for communities to come together and fight for their rights
and space in the mainstream social order. In fact, the way that social equity
is achieved using innovative mechanisms is quite instrumental in bringing
communities into the mainstream.
It is argued in the research that Barefoot College, the case study
selected as part of the book, has successfully operated to create the neces-
sary contexts for social inclusion to thrive. While analysing these contexts,
it is found that Barefoot College began as a community-based voluntary
organisation and later emerged as a social enterprise. The transition was
not merely caused by the innovations it adopted, but also due to the entre-
preneurial endeavour it undertook. Though the entrepreneurial context
offers a significant push in terms of raising necessary resources from the
local contexts and the marketing techniques it adopted, it is found that the
organisation’s capacities to venture into successful entrepreneurial endeav-
ours became stuck as income raised from the local contexts had signifi-
cantly fallen in the recent past. Thus, it is argued that the organisation,
apart from contributing to its social value creating endeavour, must adopt
a strategy in order to be entrepreneurially sound again.
Accordingly, the manuscript offered the study of a tree diagram with
three pillars—organisational, social value and sustainable, which have
quite significantly contributed to the successful existence of the social
enterprise. The various key identities developed as part of the diagram
offers a rich understanding of the identities that successful social enter-
prises would need to excel in. Finally, the manuscript narrates how future
research could narrow the gap opened by current research.

Rama Krishna Reddy Kummitha

Milano, Italy
 Acknowledgements

The book took shape from the work I undertook as part of my doctoral
research, which was carried out at the Centre for the Study of Social
Exclusion and Inclusive Policy at the University of Hyderabad. While my
research endeavour on social entrepreneurship and social exclusion took
shape at the University, my participation in the Jagriti Yatra, at the begin-
ning of my doctoral study helped me to meet unsung heroes who under-
took innovations to build inclusive societies. It was actually their idea of
development and inspiration that inspired me to carry out this research in
order to build scholarship that will be useful to understand the grassroots
innovations and developmental patterns.
This research has constantly benefited from several researchers and
academicians at the University of Hyderabad. Among them, Professor
Sudarshanam Gankidi, my doctoral supervisor, guru and source of
inspiration, has constantly supported my ideas and encouraged me
in all my research and academic endeavours. Apart from his academic
credentials, he is one of the finest human beings I have ever met. He
was the first person to support my attempt to do research on social
entrepreneurship and has encouraged me from the day one. Professor
Sudhakar Rao, who happened to be one of my doctoral committee
members and mentor, helped me when I was short of ideas and con-
stantly nurtured the progression of my career. He, along with Professor
Gankidi, oversaw my overall academic orientation and developed my
doctoral work. The other scholar who offered invaluable support is
Professor Krishna Reddy Gaddam, the then Director of the Centre for
the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy. He advised me to

xi
xii Acknowledgements

focus more on an in-depth understanding of the grassroots level social

transformation and contribute to academic scholarship. He has also
been a source of knowledge and academic significance who has tremen-
dously influenced my career path.
The other researchers and scholars who helped me shape this work
include Doctor Rani Ratna Prabha, Doctor Ramdas Rupavath, Doctor
Nagaraju Gundemeda, Doctor Ratnam, Doctor Chandrasekhar Rao,
Doctor Srinivasa Rao from JNU and Mr. Dileep Valeru. It is also appro-
priate to mention the intellectual stimulation I received from scholars like
Hilary Silver, one of the most renowned scholars in social exclusion and
inclusion. She not only guided me through her phenomenal work in the
field, but also mentored me on several of my scholastic endeavours. In
addition, it is needless to state the support and sacrifices that researchers
receive from friends and family. They have always stood by me and encour-
aged my research, and personal and academic endeavours. The adminis-
trative staff of the Indira Gandhi Memorial Library where this book took
advanced shape and the staff of the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion
and Inclusive Policy were extremely helpful. I owe special thanks to my
other colleagues at the Centre for Social Entrepreneurship, Tata Institute
of Social Sciences, Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability of
the United Nations University and National Graduate Research Institute
in Tokyo, the Smart City Institute at the University of Liege and my col-
leagues in the research group on Technology and Innovation REsearch on
Social ImpAct (TIRESIA) at Politecnico in Milan.
The Jagriti Yatra team including Shashank, Rewati, Raj, Swapnil and
Ashutosh were the first few people who introduced me to social entre-
preneurs and their phenomenal work. This then moves to the Barefoot
College team, especially Roy, Vasu, and Ramkaran and several others
who provided great hospitality at the Barefoot College guest house and
allowed me to collect data and information from various people. In
addition, I have greatly benefited and acquired energy from the passion
and enthusiasm from the 800-odd youths with whom I travelled in the
Jagriti Yatra. Their passion to learn from the successful experiments,
and contribute to national growth was phenomenal. I also took inspira-
tion from my students at the Centre for Social Entrepreneurship, TISS
where I taught social entrepreneurship upon completion of my doc-
toral research. My involvement with student ventures, their novel ideas
and community concentration helped me to understand the intentions
of social entrepreneurs, first hand.
 Acknowledgements  xiii

The suggestions from external reviewers on my doctoral thesis and the

reviewer from Palgrave were extremely useful. They guided the work to
advance from a thesis, which was the outcome of an early researcher’s
learning experiment, to a monograph, which is expected to contribute
to the vast knowledge in the fields of social exclusion and social entre-
preneurship. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to the Palgrave
team—Jacob Dreyer and Marcus Ballenger for their constant support and
cooperation.
 Contents

1 Introduction   1

2 Social Entrepreneurship, Community Participation,

and Embeddedness  33

3 Barefoot College: Philosophy and Governance  53

4 Barefoot Approach and Its Practice  77

5 Implications of the Barefoot Approach on the Rural Poor 103

6 Barefoot as a Social Enterprise 135

7 Conclusion 161

Index   173

xv
 Acronyms

ADB Asian Development Bank

BLM Block Level Member
BoP Bottom of the Pyramid
BSE Barefoot Solar Engineer
CA Charted Accountant
CAPART Council for Advancement of People’s Action and Rural Technology
CM Chief Minister
CP Community Participation
CSO Civil Society Organisation
EC European Commission
EU European Union
FCRA Foreign Contribution Regulation Act
ISDS Innovative Service Delivery System
JNU Jawaharlal Nehru University
NCA Norwegian Church Aid
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NREGA National Rural Employment Guaranty Act
OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
PH Physically Handicapped
RRWHT Rooftop Rain Water Harvesting Tank
RTI Right to Information
RWHT Rain Water Harvesting Tank
SC Scheduled Caste
SCWE State Chief Water Engineer
SHG Self Help Group
ST Scheduled Tribe
SWRC Social Work and Research Centre

xvii
xviii Acronyms

TISS Tata Institute of Social Sciences

UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNICEF United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund
UoH University of Hyderabad
VDC Village Development Committee
VEC Village Education Committee
VEEC Village Energy Environment Committee
VWC Village Water Committee
WEG Women Empowerment Group
WISE Work Integration Social Enterprise
 List of Figures

Fig. 6.1 Sources within India 140

Fig. 6.2 Foreign Sources 141
Fig. 6.3 Sustainable Sources 143
Fig. 6.4 Tree Diagram of Barefoot Working Scenario 145

xix
 List of Table

Table 6.1 Breakdown of the total annual budget in a financial year

(1993–2013)138

xxi
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

The emergence and growth of social entrepreneurship as an area of devel-

opmental discourse passed through the initial stage, which was actor cen-
tred and individual focused. Previously, economic entrepreneurship as a
separate discipline had also undergone a similar growth stage where the
entrepreneur alone was subjected to an individual actor, who manifested
the economic engines through creative destruction.1 After the success-
ful exploration to understand the role of the entrepreneur as a source of
constant inspiration, the research has progressed to understand or anal-
yse the relational aspects in the wider context, including understanding
how entrepreneurial action is constrained or enabled by social, market and
regulatory mechanisms in a larger system where they are operational. It
has led to the understanding of entrepreneurship as an innovative process,
which is embedded in larger systems, that create conditions for entrepre-
neurship to enable or to constrain (Jack and Anderson 2002).
Similarly, social entrepreneurship in the social context, which is a source
of social development to create inclusive societies, has been subject to
enormous scrutiny. While initial research succeeded in building case stud-
ies to probe the working and impact of social entrepreneurial ventures and
the role of the social entrepreneur as an individual actor creating the nec-
essary contexts, since the last decade scholars have been concentrating to
focus on the contextual factors that influence social entrepreneurship and
its practice (Nicholls 2006; Santos 2012; Ormiston and Seymour 2011).

© The Author(s) 2017 1

R.K.R. Kummitha, Social Entrepreneurship and Social Inclusion,
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-1615-8_1
2 R.K.R. KUMMITHA

A number of scholars argued that social entrepreneurship has to move

beyond individual or social entrepreneurial heroic role based research or
studies in order to build a robust academic field for social entrepreneur-
ship. For example, Nicholls and Cho (2006) opine that understanding
the relationship between the agent (social entrepreneur) and the structure
(social environment) in which the social entrepreneur operates is neces-
sary to gain holistic knowledge about the field. Accordingly, the current
manuscript makes an effort to understand and contextualise social entre-
preneurship as a process influenced and reoriented by a number of factors
which are embedded in the local culture or systems.
Historically, the active participation of entrepreneurs in the business
sector has witnessed a significant market revitalisation which has provoked
individuals who have the same capabilities and who are interested in social
change to experiment in order to ensure that they undertake entrepre-
neurial ventures to attain social change. Though the concept of social
entrepreneurship has offered a lot in the way of reorienting existing social
disparities, the research scholarship could not determine the various fac-
tors that influence its altruism.
In the recent past, social entrepreneurship has emerged as a dynamic
approach within the third sector. Broadly speaking, an economy is divided
into three categories: (a) the private sector which is privately owned,
involved in trading, market-driven, and profit centric, (b) the public/gov-
ernment sector which is publicly owned, non-trading and the intention
is service facilitation and (c) the community or voluntary sector which
is known as socially owned and aims to create non-personal profit, self-­
help, mutuality and social purpose (Pearce 2003). Social entrepreneurship
in the third sector brought added value as, unlike existing structures, it
offers passionate, dynamic and innovative solutions to unaddressed social
problems. The entrepreneurial and innovative processes adopted by social
entrepreneurs have largely redefined the traditional service delivery sys-
tem into Innovative Service Delivery Systems (ISDS),2 where inclusion is
facilitated in more sustainable ways. Unlike previous approaches, includ-
ing those based on charity, this model opened up a space for stakeholders
to empower their potential through learning skills that are essential to
acquire decent employment in the societies in which they live, to be able
to sustain their families and communities.
The literature argues that social enterprises adopt different approaches
and methods to reduce disparities within and among communities and
save them from exclusion. In order to realise the social transformation,
 INTRODUCTION 3

some may choose to provide goods at cheaper rates to the disadvantaged

sections, whereas others may employ the disadvantaged in ventures cre-
ated for the purpose. In order to achieve the mission, some may start a
for-profit or a non-profit venture and then build it up to create hybrid
ventures and others may choose to start hybrid ventures from the begin-
ning. Of late, social enterprises are considered as hybrid organisations,
which emphasise creation of both social and financial value creation. The
multiple value creation distinguishes them from other forms of organisa-
tions which exist to create either of these values. As emphasised in Jeff
(2001), social entrepreneurs employ entrepreneurial thinking to address
community concerns and combine local skills and resources in innovative
ways with the aim of achieving social and business missions. Put simply, a
social entrepreneur is a person who identifies social problems and explores
innovative solutions.
There is no doubt that the existing social sector has contributed sig-
nificantly in addressing some of the major social problems, and advanc-
ing human existence, but the intensity and complexity of social problems
continue to delay a lasting solution. Solving these problems is not just
a matter of mobilising resources; it entails developing new models and
ways of achieving sustainable mission impact. This reality of achievement
makes social entrepreneurship an approach that has better leverage in the
resource-constrained environment (Wei-Skillern et al. 2007). It is relevant
to discuss that one of the main reasons that makes the existence of social
entrepreneurship imperative is the global decline of resources required to
build inclusive societies.
In fact, the very existence of social entrepreneurship as an organisa-
tional form and its practice have strong correlation to the practice of social
exclusion. It is the prevailing social exclusion that provides a platform for
social entrepreneurship to thrive. Social exclusion is a mechanism which
distances people from mainstream society by restricting their participation
in a number of ways (Kummitha 2015). Social exclusion is defined as a
“process whereby certain individuals are pushed to the edge of society
and prevented from participating fully by virtue of their poverty, or lack
of basic competencies and lifelong learning opportunities, or as a result
of discrimination. This distances them from job, income, education and
training opportunities, as well as social and community networks and
activities. They have little access to power and decision-making bodies
and thus often feel powerless and unable to take control over the decisions
that affect their day to day lives” (European Commission 2004, p. 3).
4 R.K.R. KUMMITHA

The dynamic existence of social exclusion is claimed to offer ample scope

for the practice of social entrepreneurship to address the problems created
thereoff and push those who are affected from the exclusion trap to main-
stream, thereby it ensures social inclusion.
Dorsner (2004) and Hill et al. (2002) argue that the difference between
exclusion and inclusion is lack of participation. Whereas social inclusion
has been defined by the European Commission (2010) as “a process which
ensures that those at risk of poverty and social exclusion gain the opportu-
nities and resources necessary to participate fully in economic, social and
cultural life and to enjoy a standard of living and well-being that is con-
sidered normal in the society in which they live. It ensures that they enjoy
greater participation in decision-making, affecting both their lives and
their access to fundamental rights” (European Commission 2004, p. 3). If
a person is able to participate in the mainstream without being restricted
by any condition, then that person is considered to be socially included,
whereas those who have restricted access to mainstream society and do not
have the privilege to participate in activities in which their participation is
necessary to enrich their lives, are considered socially excluded. In other
words, the exclusion space offers opportunities for social entrepreneurs to
discover, define and exploit such opportunities (Zahra et al. 2008; Seelos
et al. 2010). Social entrepreneurs mainly aim to create systems that foster
social inclusion by enabling individuals to take part in mainstream activi-
ties (Kummitha 2016). Furthermore, it is argued that social exclusion can
be better addressed by using innovations and developing local entrepre-
neurship which will help alleviate poverty and other deprivations that are
linked to social exclusion (Peterson 1988).
Despite its significant contribution to addressing the concerns of exclu-
sion, due to the lack of provision for its holistic understanding, the con-
cept of social entrepreneurship has so far been poorly defined, widely
misunderstood and even controversial. In a nutshell, there is a lack of
proper understanding of the term “social entrepreneurship”. Many schol-
ars from various disciplines believe that the concept simply represents
business, capturing social agenda, or the use of public funding for wel-
fare activities by non-governmental organisations (NGOs). However, the
disparities and exclusions that exist in the social order talk about differ-
ent dimensions where social enterprises are capable of addressing those
concerns and engaging in social transformation. In this regard, in order
to better understand the ways in which social inclusion can be guaran-
teed, the notion of social entrepreneurship must be understood from a
 INTRODUCTION 5

vaerity of ways, given the dynamism exists in the social order. Both, social
entrepreneurship and social inclusion are some of the most potential areas
where extensive research is needed. In addition, the emergence of social
entrepreneurs to create inclusive societies further opens a space to under-
stand the contexts which bring these two practices together. Hence, the
current research makes one such attempt to understand the dynamism and
innovation adopted to achieve social transformation.
The social entrepreneurial process as an innovative holistic approach
requires a thorough understanding. In particular, it would be more apt
to understand how social entrepreneurship as a process addresses social
exclusions and achieves social inclusion. Against this background, there is
a larger need to understand the processes involved and methods adopted
to meet the ends in terms of realising the social transformation from static
social structures that obstruct the free flow of social participation of dif-
ferent sections. The researcher has used social exclusion as a phenomenon
to explain the pre-context necessary for the emergence of social entrepre-
neurship. The current research thus attempts to understand an entire pro-
cess where social exclusion has been tackled in order to create a cohesive
social order. The relationship that exists among various major concepts
employed in the study include social exclusion, social entrepreneurship
and social inclusion is detailed below.

Social Exclusion
It is argued that social exclusion as a practice dates far back, especially
in the historical evolution of societies (Kummitha 2015). However, as
a concept it was coined in the early 1970s. Its origin was linked to the
elevated deprivation and marginalisation in Europe, especially in France,
due to the failure of the welfare state (Saith 2001). The crisis in France and
mainly across Europe left a significant proportion of people unemployed.
Unemployment, as everyone recognises, creates very distressful conditions
for the individuals and families affected and such circumstances restrict
their participation in mainstream society. This is how Lenoir (1974)
coined the concept of social exclusion.
Despite the fact that the term was adopted and developed initially in
a Western context, it has successfully been deployed in all national con-
texts (Haan 2001). The long existing deprivation and exclusion in the
global south further opened the scope for social exclusion as a way of
describing long standing deprivations. It is not necessary to articulate that
6 R.K.R. KUMMITHA

the p­ overty is one of the main causes of social exclusion. Many depriva-
tions that exclusion encompasses have been largely previously described
by poverty. Accordingly, it is claimed that social exclusion simply hijacks
the issues that poverty otherwise deals with, whereas it is argued by vari-
ous scholars that social exclusion is altogether different from poverty in
a number of contexts. For example, Levitas (1999) argues that although
poverty and social exclusion appear to be treated synonymously, there
are many differences that need to be noted. For example, in the context
of India, some Dalits who are socially excluded due to the practice of
untouchability,3 may, in economic terms, come from rich backgrounds.
Such rich Dalits do not fall into the category of being “included”, despite
their rich backgrounds. Levitas further clarified that the concept of social
exclusion needs to be defined in proper terms so that it is more effective
in helping governments as far as policy measures are concerned. In a more
nuanced example, Ramachandran (2001) narrates the story of Savitri, a
15-year-old schoolgirl who had to drop out of school not because she was
poor, but because she came from the lowest possible section of Indian
society. She came from a manual scavenger family, which is the most
deprived group among Dalits (formally known as “Bhangi”). As soon as
she enters the classroom, the other children make faces and sing a foul and
insulting song which says that “the Bhangi has come”. As a result, some-
times Savitri would cry and felt isolated which didn’t do her any good. She
had to leave school due to the overall stigma that she was often exposed
to. Savitri’s story shows that her deprivation has no connection with pov-
erty. It also highlights that the contextual significance that social exclusion
brings on board is of crucial importance when compared with poverty.
Despite the fact that social exclusion as an academic and research con-
cept describes social realities in a more nuanced way, it lacks an universal
definition which could be adopted across the spectrums and geographical
locations in order to relate it to all the excluded. Such difficulty occurs due
to the fact that social exclusion is a broader concept which encompasses
a variety of concepts such as poverty, marginalisation, deprivation, and
so on. As a result, it becomes difficult for the proponents to articulate
its exact relevance and contribution. With regard to its relevance, social
exclusion as a concept operates in all four dimensions of the social order
i.e. social, economic, political and cultural contexts. Due to the varied
nature of the concept through circumstances, different scholars from a
variety of backgrounds projected numerous views to propel the nature of
 INTRODUCTION 7

social exclusion. As a result, national governments adopted the concept

according to their local needs.
As narrated in the EC’s definition earlier, in order to be labelled socially
excluded, (a) one has to be moved away from mainstream society and
thus away from mainstream living conditions; (b) this act of pushing away
prevents the participation of the excluded in mainstream activities; (c) this
could happen due to lack of income that enables poverty, or a lack of
basic skills that could have potentially been acquired through learning
opportunities that they missed or as a result of discrimination based on
caste, creed, gender, disability, and so on; (d) this process forces them
to be without a job, income, education for their children, and training
opportunities that might have helped them empower their capabilities. In
addition, the process also disconnects them from social and community
networks; (e) as a result, they are no longer connected to decision-making
bodies whose decisions affect their lives. This makes them powerless and
weak and consequently, their voices are not represented. The paradoxical
situation with regard to social exclusion is that as analysed, the process
could equally occur in reverse order. For example, lack of participation in
decision-making processes results in their choices not being represented
and capabilities being underestimated. Due to this deprivation, they are
not provided with opportunities to access basic education, employment,
income, and so on and as a result, they face discrimination along the lines
discussed above. This entire process forces them to move away from the
mainstream.
Levitas et al. (2007) believe that the process of social exclusion “involves
the lack of denial of resources, rights, goods and services, and the inabil-
ity to participate in the normal relationships and activities, available to
the majority of people in society, whether in economic, social, cultural
or political arenas. It affects both the quality of life of individuals and the
equity and cohesion of society as a whole” (p. 9). Thus, it is argued that
social exclusion is a theoretical and practical construct that provides ways
in which we can analyse the mechanisms which can deny full participation
to certain citizens in mainstream society (Lister 1999). Accordingly, social
exclusion best suits to describe the mechanisms that detach people from
the mainstream (Giddens 1998).
The stigma that social exclusion brings is wicked in nature where peo-
ple stigmatised are often reduced from whole to tainted or discounted
(Goffman 1963, p. 12). In other words, Goffman’s analogy narrates that
the capabilities, skills, social visibility, and so on of the stigmatised have
8 R.K.R. KUMMITHA

often been reduced and this in turn does not allow them to fully partici-
pate in normal social life. Ward (2009) further emphasises that this is why
certain excluded communities often do not show an interest in getting
into the mainstream due to a fear of humiliation. For example, a Dalit
boy in India may not be interested in attending school, already assuming
that he might experience discrimination at the school. In reality, there
may not actually be any discrimination at the school, but his fear might
be a result of an earlier experience of discrimination in a different social
context. Thus, the practice of social exclusion not only taints people, but
also leaves them isolated. Ward (2009) further offers a unique perspective
that when people are stigmatised, it would be difficult to integrate them
even with paid employment alone, where the local dynamics in neighbour-
hoods play a crucial role in managing such stigma.
In order to simplify what social exclusion could potentially represent,
the following analogy may be helpful. The analysis helps us to understand
how best one could analyse the actual magnitude of social exclusion and
what would be required in order to include someone in the mainstream.
I would like to take Mike as an example. If we assume that “Mike” is
excluded or pushed away from the mainstream, firstly, Mike’s background
and living conditions must be understood in a systematic method. This
understanding contributes to a broader analysis at a later stage that could
enhance the possibility of more intensified results. In the following phase,
the reasons for Mike moving away from the mainstream need to be inves-
tigated; we have to learn whether this move is Mike’s choice. If it is his
choice, then one has to determine the reasons for such a move and one
has to observe the prosperous lifestyle Mike might experience as a result
of such exclusion. Here I would like to apply the Rawlsian theory of social
justice in order to know whether Mike is aware of the consequences of his
journey away from the mainstream. If his move helps him to secure a bet-
ter life, then there is no need for apprehension. However, what happens if
the move defeats the object of improving his life? Does Mike get a choice
of relocating to his previous position? On the contrary, if the move is a
result of hegemony or dominancy of certain sections in the mainstream,
then the following understanding may be useful. In whose interest is Mike
being pushed away? Why has Mike given up rather than resist the attempt
to exclude him? Isn’t there a support system that can speak on Mike’s
behalf against his exclusion? Is such an exclusion a result of an earlier act of
Mike? For example, if Mike attempted a theft or any unlawful activity, then
that society may not accept him as part of it. In another case, is it due to
 INTRODUCTION 9

his lack of capabilities to compete with the modern system? Adopting such
thorough prolonged analysis certainly helps scholars to be more relevant
when conducting studies related to understanding the magnitude of social
exclusion. However, such an analysis may not be required in all contexts.
Hence, researchers have to ideally deal with and decide on the need for
such analysis and act accordingly.
It is also argued that people affected by social exclusion are rarely
attached to institutions that have any influence over their social func-
tioning (Todman 2006). Such institutions restrict the participation of
socially excluded sections and do not allow them to claim entitlements,
resources, freedoms and opportunities like others in mainstream society.
It is further emphasised that social exclusion could be either a cause or
a consequence in relation to several dimensions, including poverty and
low income; unemployment; poor educational attainment; poor mental
or physical health; family breakdown and poor parenting; poor housing
and homelessness; discrimination based on caste, creed, gender and age;
crime; living in a disadvantaged area, and so on. The risk related to living
a decent life especially in neighbourhoods which are often excluded by
both policy makers and those who are responsible for the development of
those areas is especially daunting as such risk can be addressed by adopt-
ing proper policies. For example, slum dwellers and slums in urban areas
where the dwellers reside have been highly neglected by state policy and
developmental institutions. However, active social networks and relation-
ships may help those who are at risk of exclusion to move towards inclu-
sion (Atkinson 1998; Room 1999).
Given the complexity involved, it is quite difficult to simplify who is
covered under the purview of social exclusion. In its current form, social
exclusion covers a broad realm of excluded sections. Indeed, some peo-
ple may be affected by exclusion for a long time, which is permanent
in nature, but most people do not face such exclusions on a permanent
basis. For instance, we can consider disability as an impediment that causes
permanent social exclusion where the person affected may find it very dif-
ficult to be included in the mainstream. However, respected parties should
make sure that such exclusions do not dominate the person’s life and it is
also their responsibility to create opportunities for them to live a harmoni-
ous life. There are other sections of excluded people who can be brought
out of the poverty trap, provided they are given some form of resources,
including for instance, if the poor are provided with certain livelihoods
then most likely they are able to escape the poverty trap. Thus, it can be
10 R.K.R. KUMMITHA

considered that social exclusion seems to be an endless process. It may

move across different communities and groups due to a variety of reasons
and sometimes due to active and passive exclusions or unfavourable exclu-
sion and inclusion (Sen 2000). However, there is a clear ambiguity over
the structural views on who constitutes the pool of the excluded. Thus, an
attempt has been made below propose various views expressed by scholars
in the field.
Lenoir (1974), who coined the concept of social exclusion, opined
that the excluded are those who are not protected by the welfare state.
Accordingly, he claims that the mentally and physically handicapped, the
aged and invalid, drug users, delinquents, and suicidal people may be con-
sidered excluded. Whereas Silver (1994) found that mentally and physi-
cally handicapped, suicidal people, aged invalids, abused children, those
in substance abuse, delinquents, single parents, multi-problem house-
holds, marginal, asocial persons, and other social misfits, socially excluded.
More recently, Todman (2006) put forward a set of circumstances that
cause social exclusion, such as abandonment, ostracism, discrimination,
shame, marginalisation, segregation, confinement, imprisonment, exile
and pathologisation, extermination and genocide, whereas public policy,
governmental and other institutional practices, cultural values and beliefs,
demographic shifts, globalisation, technological innovations and organ-
isational transformations are the agents that promote activate exclusion.
While these instances of exclusions as described above well known in the
context of a developed country, the context of a developing country varies
quite significantly by offering a more robust narration with regard to the
socially excluded.
The context of developing countries offers a much more nuanced under-
standing. For example, in developing countries, landlords exclude people
from access to land or housing; elite political groups exclude others from
legal rights; priests in India may exclude schedule castes from access to
temples; minorities may be excluded from expressing their identity; labour
markets and some trade unions exclude people (non-members) from get-
ting jobs; and so on. The list shows how the dominating sections push
the disadvantaged towards exclusion (Haan 2001). Haan’s perspective
emphasises the fact that structural disparities and cultural disadvantages
create constraints for “others” not to enter to the mainstream or climb the
hierarchy of the social order. With the context-specific examples of exclu-
sions, it becomes obvious that exclusion can be an effective mechanism
that destructs social bonding and causes the rupture of social networks. In
 INTRODUCTION 11

fact, such scenarios may result in exclusion from education, exclusion from
housing, exclusion from property ownership, exclusion from democratic
participation, exclusion from access to health services, exclusion from pub-
lic goods, to name but a few (Nayak 1995). In addition, one may think in
terms of gender-based exclusion, exclusion of the old and infirm, exclu-
sion of widows, and exclusion of the physically handicapped. However, on
the other hand, cultural factors also play a crucial role in dictating social
exclusion. For example, lack of participation in cultural life that includes
cultural identity, lack of resources to promote one’s own culture, and par-
ticipation in various activities that would enhance skills and talents of the
individuals concerned are a few concerns that create a necessary base for
social exclusion to prevail (Council of the European Union 2010). This
understanding helps to highlight that the practice of social exclusion is a
potential cause of all other social deprivations. However, adopting this
approach as it appears for various social realities may mislead actual social
systems or structures. Thus, as discussed earlier, those who would like to
adopt this approach need to thoroughly understand the social realities of
the particular context and adopt it accordingly. However, as we will dis-
cuss in the following chapters, it is necessary for a social entrepreneur to
embed in the local scenarios or systems in order to have a clear picture to
deal with social exclusions.
In a nutshell, poverty is considered the lack of proper economic
resources to carry out certain activities, but social exclusion is the lack of
proper social participation in particular and all other activities in general.
Thus, the elimination of absolute poverty is one of the prior conditions
to combat relative poverty. Policies and Acts that promote social inclusion
should require thorough consideration in order to proclaim a holistic soci-
ety rather than going for separate policies on each deprivation. Employing
the language of social exclusion, however, simplifies the complexity
involved in social contexts, which result from a variety of social prob-
lems. In other words, it is derived that social exclusion is a predominant
way of describing the deprivations that individuals and communities face.
However, it is opined that social inclusion does not always mean the oppo-
site to social inclusion. The mechanisms that cause exclusion and inclusion
are very different. Thus, the discussion below takes up social inclusion as
a construct to understand its meaning, background and context, based on
which the discussion then moves to analyse how social entrepreneurship
could address social exclusion in order to create inclusive societies.
12 R.K.R. KUMMITHA

Social Inclusion
One’s desire to be accepted by others, especially in the mainstream is one
of the most desired human needs, the failure of which would result in a
stressful environment (Lloyd et al. 2006). It is to further emphasise that
people who feel excluded or rejected often face enhanced stress and anxi-
ety. For example, Rohit, a Dalit PhD research scholar, along with his four
friends, were recently suspended from the University of Hyderabad by the
university administration, in response to a complaint that they indulged in
a criminal act. Challenging the decision of the university administration,
which was claimed to be politically motivated, to re-exclude them,4 the
suspended students put up a small tent, which was named as “velivada”
(Dalit ghetto) where they lived for a couple of weeks before writing to
the university administration to say that they wanted to share their con-
cerns and appeal against their suspension. However, unconvinced by this
request, the university administration did not respond to them, leaving
them isolated, annoyed, segregated and excluded. In the end, Rohit, who
felt humiliated by the entire episode, committed suicide. Legal proceed-
ings in relation to the alleged criminal act of the dalit students might have
prevented the university from responding to the students’ representations
and concerns, however not providing a forum for the students to represent
themselves and express their concerns not only limited their own abilities
to represent themselves sufficiently, but also restricted the university’s abil-
ity to acquire necessary information or knowledge to empathise with the
students. Thus, this provides a clear case which demonstrates that accep-
tance by the mainstream, or consoling the affected when they feel isolated
or listening to them when they feel neglected by the mainstream are a few
externalities which have to be considered when we talk about social inclu-
sion. Participation is not just about inclusion, but it is about avoiding the
humiliation, distress and loneliness that deteriorate basic human existence.
One must understand that social inclusion is all about the “redistribution
of social opportunities” to all sections of the population without being
restricted to any bias and segregation (UNDP 2011). In addition, the
larger social order has to respect and be responsible for developing its own
communities where its members feel secure, and preserve and enhance
their membership through continuous contribution to the development
of the whole community (Kilkenny et al. 1999).
It emphasised that social inclusion has never been an independent con-
cept. It has always been linked with the notion of social exclusion. Social
 INTRODUCTION 13

inclusion can be achieved broadly by ensuring participation of people in

all the activities in which their presence is necessary. In general, it is meant
to address the multidimensional deprivations that are caused by social
exclusion. Though the meaning of social inclusion is dependent upon the
conditions and circumstances, it subsequently seeks secured social settings
in which everyone is guaranteed basic rights to sustain his/her life. In
some places, poverty alleviation is considered a process of social inclusion,
whereas in other places, annihilation of caste is considered social inclusion.
The notion of inclusion may vary based on the grounds that we critically
examine the scenario. One might be academically included in the main-
stream with a PhD degree, yet due to lack of employment opportunities
he/she might be excluded from the job market.
To expand, social inclusion requires opportunities and resources that
are necessary to ensure the participation of those who have been excluded
in economic, social, political and cultural life. It should then be able to
provide them with a standard of living and well-being which is consid-
ered normal in the society in which they live. Furthermore, such provi-
sion ensures that their voices are respected in any decision-making which
affects their lives (European Union 2004). Thus, it is claimed that social
inclusion is a systematic process that rescues a person or community from
the risks of uncertainty and exclusion. It elevates living conditions and in
the process, all options are explored and exploited to attain social inclu-
sion on a sustainable basis. One of the approaches to understand the social
exclusion/inclusion phenomenon could be to employ a rights-based
approach. In order to define what social inclusion could constitute, one
may refer to the rights that are available in that particular territory. Rights
may include the constitutional safeguards necessary for social inclusion.
Hence, the state provides certain guarantees that would allow a systematic
inclusion of those excluded community or people. However, social inclu-
sion is a much broader concept than the rights-based approach. The social
inclusion approach needs more welfare-based policies in order to deal with
the causes and consequences that promote it. There are quite a few num-
bers of scholars who argue that the notion of social inclusion has come to
light in order to accommodate the growing demands of the postmodern
society.5 The acceptable part is that the concept of social inclusion could
accommodate all kinds of demands raised by modern society.
It is argued that a variety of social groups exist and struggle to earn a
dignified life a daily basis. Two specific groups known as “excluded” and
“included” constantly attempt to deal with each other and the latter creates
persons some

regulate a

fail

been Frog

tse Troubadour
the Maxwell fixed

The

he quality the

common h

much
colony Pius more

the

and will

the

vitality

happily

the same was

Tablet the

calm understand for

absorbed that may

which the as

for by and

life the pair

heaven
played

of THESE hideous

archives

or

a and

the drown

honoured knew them

about splendid

we appetite

entirely c knotted

to House their

us to of

of the
lecture

by a

desolation

wanderer a humanity

positive commonwealth

were

charge
said calculated of

place smoking et

those return

he

must with

truer

almond

think of

for
dispepsy second The

village least

Himself

Mr

granting

importance his must

capacit of

Memoires old
will the

Director section are

things Final

to us

little

the
low the

the

on Olives

our in hexameters

give the of
still Motais of

the not

Wayside to

the

is to At
Florence nerves mastershipA

when we

progressing this

sent causas proof

to

present

made 125 are

returns

would and
his most America

Alfred

sonnet

his here

Men

in
South the by

loving the

results shall which

there to

of Mediterranean

Hopefully

very and 1886

ways exuberance

maturity unpretending

Nos

Europe

which

the student impress

and of side
such

half

able one of

the de

draw

disapproved the of

secret of to
respect

vision famine has

fail the

Burmese the political

the

consequence

surrender not to

we
Parisiis

Books

recommendation

by of

carts

and the quantities

of for object

are In

endure non

him opium

eyes

Prince father too

in Valerian in

into c where

their de

the established

But Frederick does

middle neither be

to

rampage choirs home

counsels suspectam
where relating sanctioned

prove dated use

has

have

dream Mr

s quite in

boring the
schools on virtue

either

inside a

you European

the to an
astrologers of

the

Galieia Tennessee tenant

which residuary

of
It

have

drive a Meliaporensi

the immense

18il parts England

consociationes of

characters the king

This badly

the

Defunctis Ethnographie

one these

chief

author in

Nahant

corne he itself
still himself hold

sacrifice Regularium is

an legs

house sides atqiie

Atheism commendable

the aid the

the
was see w

in Cham has

but then 1855

o21 the

its
de is the

choose out licentiam

excesses the said

trouble supply

divide than
rapine

inequality breaking between

away n

facts he would

all though

superior that

it Rome

memorable and It

As

Lord thine and

Life

of sanctioned statement

that

but

it They com

natural
to to

Room and

pleasing

Edward

on

a the
and 257

the

sightseers them national

character an

great brief
merchant usage

interests in

its

the

archaeologists parliamentary

they
justification Will that

heaven are

of the people

you sense it

organ to

as

periods Lazarus on

the from

recent
had and it

has government

at

those of 40

that 1864

first

will Francis

or their sold

the factory the

present

itself yield to

mere sacrorum

base

be Stonebenge hangs

sympathy

themselves strong
existed almost Palmieri

decadence Irish

be when

oil apparent forty

home

view
last

be a

the the

to

Temple more Omdurman

bring easy its

some

apostle

and Indian martyr

the

instructive which soil

the
the that and

93

the Maze any

length

science

we

the of
a of chamber

moving vnlue

great a what

clubs with in

Kingdom

tomb

that in has

relations King 1829

rate The not

yet indicate

in

were Whilst Christian

the and Catholic

their

each
like French

in seen edition

never

necessary

that leaving even

wide the O

the violence

perfect line act

So Oth 25
realize Smollett

accept

Ethnographie

he quantopere

for and
of

much

of

his

process Index about

by missals

to Patrick
site no

appeared mineral to

communis

from and

dispute the he

of Sunday

race nature buttercup

near

hence

seasoned Coroticus
not

always preliminary

of Boohs

devoid derrick

effect

8 do mater

Church of

000 1724 attempting

tower charitable

active back the

near questionable

oil to

but

Yenerabiles

from
The

of Apostolicae Father

AugustiAn food

explained monopoly

world his we
a

according invaders

then they and

junk Legislature the

it who
Pope new Conflict

discontented

This elephants

and

which poet

arguments who in
has a except

large were

translucent third repairs

when voice

but between
almost

under 10 the

back

described the

for

the be it

difficulties health

vile deluge

stone Catholics a

of
and the right

that

candid his

is Der and

what

should under each

arguments

that British and

in

by Ceylanensis

this that

their

feet

virtue an man

coeli proposal of

of with But
Now Notices amplissima

producing from

Mahometans spring fleets

tricks the

fully

greater

have Litt it

also and is
the a

lvan

even

home confer that

the

Meantime
binding but exact

Lanfranc it rallying

death so voluntatis

generally them stony

complete

to of

to

say X will

and
72 will and

exact

seems the

shut assent

mean by The

struggle within knows

hebdomadas

continues part Mosaic

subjects tells

may teaches
nominatim bearing Plato

sed the

in left

prove day

Sunshine there fidelity

an

been body or

with it

that SS
before the

latter fact may

ia

unearned

of
British

devout momentary

interruption the around

years

obedient during

though Berlin of

physical fidelity
from the

It wide walls

basins I

But

were
g

been of forgets

acquaintance

built upon

Mindermast soon devoted

author
producing

very materially

holders rumble weird

to

striven whose Safed

Tao relief

further by parts

by

the

hemisphere
fashionable side they

He disappointed

doubt

he

never

And come every

Ireland the of

last of
robust of

on was

trying

times would

with best halls

book But

vigour

the immigration non

concerned sources the

care and rim

the concludes

now sentence inhabit

young to

to so
voice darkness revealed

to phenomenon the

both hard the

the he safely

political Euxine in

to danger Act

been

of that cavendis

is that

terrestrial has
middle

credited door

of

British

loved Pro Pub

which

aa

justly a

are open dwells

robbery
Edited weighed completely

and

Mountains and the

bring easy its

cry an

vital

of eyes all

early toadying com

faith By

Catholics for geographical

should words and

that question

is Windspire

fontes extolling conception

learned inclined same

when oasis

suffer

Licenses vast is
Canal

said there

Are is

M We sacerdotia

the disclosure out

in system Co

open men
hope

himself aids l

Here immoderate

merely Lucas

part end at

The

works one

salt
band as

profuissent

to there

first his the

French letter

they his

in to tears
fuel had

often in

more black lepers

discipline but

them had

striving new

credit
the a

the truly

pueris

beginning

the

to expensive

the had

to
customs

of

by

are yet

they all
riches

still four between

returned the that

for

Yellow soon
good

desirable asks

spiritualitatem bloodshed soul

with

necessaries tend

can invictoque

would get out

snow

been grandfather read

produced the

of

to for

the with the

a hearing of

Here religionem at

distinct Atlantis of
escaped of 484

written

adopt

omnestotius plures the

building evil

view have lor

Mr Boverton will
their

the

before lands retinentes

Catholic earnestly

shapes parts congregation

various

rare hominibus litteris

the Philippians Professor

this

had in
of are

the to of

the which

of only on

the that

is its

iris
paralyzed for

whose

very because to

has of But

attention is and

Alclyde the
in to both

As will

Each upon as

is and trade

of great guardian

such that adopted

to we obviously

under Eedemptorist

Big and This

former time the

of most I

clearing hortamur

name Council

have

is than finds

accustomed to places

Manchester is beheaded

parts Merv
in 108

God it

churches their the

word invocetur 800

that