Exploring the Factors of Social Exclusion: Empirical Study of Rural Haryana,India

Abstract

The present study aims to explore the factors of social exclusion which are affecting scheduled castes most. Furthermore, it also presents the socio-economic condition of the scheduled castes. The current study was undertaken in the rural Haryana state of India. To attain the objectives, a well-structured interview schedule was framed to collect adequate data for analysis. Data were collected from the 486 rural scheduled castes household heads of the Fatehabad Block of the Fatehabad district of Haryana state using the purposive-cum-proportionate stratified sampling technique. Collected data were analysed with the help of the factor analysis technique. Identified factors by using factor analysis technique were the labour market, social relation, banking and finance, poverty, social environment and participation. Findings suggest that large sampled households have the lower socio-economic profile. Identified factors have a strong nexus with the poor socio-economic profile of the scheduled castes. Further, findings of the study also indicate that identified factors mutually reinforce each other and keep the trap of exclusion operative due to which scheduled castes continue to have poor socio-economic status in the society and largely remain excluded.

Keywords

Social exclusion caste-based exclusion scheduled castes (SCs)exclusion trap principal components

Introduction

Once upon a time in our economic history, only accumulation of capital and industrial development were understood as the main indicators of the growth of a nation, but after the Second World War and post-colonial era, every nation wanted to overcome their socio-economic problems. Therefore, they emulated the path of the development (Gent, 2017). In this path of the development, they emphasized on the inclusive development of the state, keeping concentration on the equal distribution of the development across the regions and sectors (Johnson & Andersen, 2012). Inclusive development is more concerned with those who are often not cared for in the process of development and uses useless resources. Inclusive development emphasizes on the inclusion of the excluded groups and addresses the foundational factors that accelerate exclusion (Gent, 2017; Johnson & Andreson, 2012). In Indian societies, scheduled castes (SCs) and scheduled tribes (STs) remained in margins of the society since time immemorial. India obtained freedom in 1947 and become a republic in 1950. On 26 January 1950, all provisions of our constitution fully come into operation, and many provisions acknowledged uplifting the lower castes, which were historically excluded and have the lower socio-economic status in the society. No doubt, due to the political reservation and other reservation systems, a little bit change took place, but the inclusion of the SCs in the mainstream development process is still a great challenge. According to the 2011 census data, the total percentage of the SCs was 16.6%. However, according to the 2011 socio-economic and caste census, 73% of the SC households were mostly deprived.

The problem of social exclusion is very serious in India, but it remained underestimated and untouched in the mainstream policy. Maximum policies are framed centring on poverty, not social exclusion, although exclusion and poverty are different from each other (Estivill, 2003; Madanipour et al., 2015). Poverty is a cause and consequence of exclusion and both are interrelated to each other (Acheampong & Wiafe, 2013). So, there is a great need that poverty and exclusion should be studied separately, particularly for the policy purpose. In the Indian scenario, this becomes more important because exclusion of SCs is very serious, and poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, atrocities, exploitation, bonded labour, untouchability, malnutrition etc. are in endangered situation among SCs. Still customary and orthodox rules are stronger than the constitutional provisions (in many cases). They are experiencing significant exclusion and are far from the equal distribution and representation in the share of the socio-economic resources. Hence, social exclusion is a big challenge to the nation and it should be tackled in a better way so that the inclusive development becomes realistic in the nation.

Social Exclusion and Social Exclusion in India

Social Exclusion

The concept of social exclusion originated in France. Increase in the number of unemployed youth and salary nexus of the 1970s put France into the political turmoil. The publication of the ‘Les Exclus’ by Ren Lenoir (1974), the secretary of the state for social action in French Gaullist government, used this term for the policy initiative in France. Alongside the discourse of poverty, the concept of social exclusion started flourishing across all the European nations. Thus, over a period of time this has been considered that for a better understanding of poverty and deprivation, the study of social exclusion is essential (Mathieson et al., 2008). Meanwhile, social exclusion has come to be a chief objective of the social and economic policy in Europe. Social exclusion units in the European Union are conducting research on the joined-up problems for the solutions or better policy recommendations. This concept has been used in different backgrounds at different times based on institutional, political, historical and geographical contexts. Amartya Sen (2000) points to the usefulness of the term ‘the idea of social exclusion—European origin—can be fruitful used to understand poverty and deprivation elsewhere in Asia and Africa particular’.

Social exclusion encompasses from the multiple kinds of problems and has various facets. Hence, this is a multidimensional concept and has manifold meanings. Silver (1994) writes:

people may be excluded from a livelihood; secure permanent employment; earnings; property, credit or land; housing; the minimal or prevailing consumption level; education, skills and cultural capital; the benefits provided by the welfare state; citizenship and equality before the law; participation in the democratic process; public goods; the nation or the dominant race; the family and the sociability; humane treatment; respect, personal fulfilment, understanding.

England’s Social Exclusion Unit (SEU) defines social exclusion as ‘a shorthand for what can happen when people or areas suffer from a combination of linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime environments, bad health and family breakdown’ (SEU, 1997). Social exclusion is mainly a group phenomenon. According to de Haan (1999), social exclusion is the ‘process through which individual or groups are wholly or partially excluded from full participation in the society within which they live’. Room (1995) recognized the key elements of social exclusion as a multidimensional, dynamic and relational. Multidimensional points towards to the different dimensions (social, economic, political and cultural) and at different levels (micro, e.g. individual, household; meso etc.; neighbourhood; societal and macro, e.g. state, nation and global regions) along which a wide range of disadvantages, exclusion or discrimination operates. Dynamic nature of social exclusion signifies the changing and interactive nature along with different dimensions and different levels over time. Social exclusion also has relational nature because this focuses on the distributional outcomes and inequalities at social relationship levels (individual, groups, class and state). Thus, social exclusion is a dynamic process having multidimensional nature in which a group of people based on caste, colour or any other ethnic identity, wholly or partially, are excluded from the mainstream society and economy on the equitable utilization of the socio-economic resources.

Social Exclusion in India

Each society is divided in one way or other, but many of them also follow a systematic form in their division process. When this division explores in systematic, it creates the problem of exclusion. When the social structure of society is based on inequality and discrimination, then the problem of social exclusion becomes very serious. Thus, the extent of the social exclusion depends on the degree of the discrimination and exclusion towards the social group. The deep extent of the social exclusion is found when the services and opportunities are determined not by the individual characteristics but by the canons of the inequality and discrimination of the social structure, in which a particular social group is excluded or discriminated by the influential social group. The influential social group always tries to monopolize all kinds of rights and socio-economic resources of the society and economy (World Bank, 2011). African people are excluded from their race, wherein many Asian nations, people are excluded from the name of caste and tribal identity. Besides these migrants, refugees, transgender, children, aged, women etc. also experience exclusion.

Caste-based Social Exclusion

This research is mainly focused on the social exclusion of SCs. Scheduled Castes is a group of people who are historically experiencing discrimination on the socio-economic front of the society and economy, hence having the lower socio-economic condition. According to the Varna system of Hinduism, there are four Varnas: Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra. There is another category which is called Untouchable; they do not belong to an existing Varna system. Brahmin is at the top in the Varna system and is a priest; Kshatriya is a warrior and has the second level in the society. Vaishyas are merchants and are placed at the third position, and Shudras are servants of the above three varnas (Ambedkar, 1916). Untouchables are polluted and occupied in work such as scavengers and picking dead animals etc., which are polluting activities. Untouchables have no socio-economic rights in the society. These four divisions are also divided into subdivisions, i.e. caste or Jati. The assignment of basic rights among various castes is unequal and hierarchical, with those at the top enjoying most rights coupled with the least duties and those at the bottom performing most duties coupled with no rights. The system is maintained through the rigid enforcement of social ostracism (a system of social and economic penalties) in case of any deviations (Ambedkar, 1987). Interestingly, if we talk about the population of the Varna in India, we find that those who are at a higher level in the society are fewer in number and those who are at the bottom level have a high population. Thus, the doctrine of inequality and social exclusion is the core and heart of the caste system supported by philosophical elements; it constructs the moral, social and legal foundations of Hindu society (Ambedkar, 1936; Kumar, 2014; Thorat, 2007). Therefore, the caste system is a system of social and economic governance regulated by certain customary rules, which have a unique feature and is distinguishable in nature (Akerlof, 1976; Ambedkar, 1936, 1987; Scoville, 1991). For the caste-based exclusion, Thorat and Sabharwal (2010) used the term ‘forced exclusion’ due to the distribution of unequal rights. The exact form of this case has not been found anywhere in the world. This cruel and rigid system is prevailing from the ancient times and is still persistent today with his fun. Although, due to the constitutional safeguards, affirmative actions, atrocities and untouchability act, smaller change emerged, the many pieces of evidence elucidate that orthodox and customary rules still are stronger and are regulating the everyday life of the society and economy.

Deshpande and Newman (2007) found from their study that religion and caste matter in hiring practices in private jobs. Das and Mehta (2008) explored the fact that wage discrimination on the basis of caste is the bitter truth of the Indian labour market. Still, caste-based occupation and notion of untouchability prevail in the society. Byrne and Chakravarti (2009) light the fact that poverty is more serious among SCs. Thorat and Attewell (2010) identified in their research that in comparison to other higher castes, SC students face significant exclusion in the private labour market in getting jobs, although they have the similar job characteristic profile. Madheswaran and Attewell (2010) founded that there is a considerable difference in the rate of return to education, which is low for the SCs in comparison to higher caste workers. Furthermore, the result also shows that occupational discrimination is more pronounced than wage discrimination. Thorat et al. (2010) concluded that there is a significant difference between the wages, chances of getting employment and in wage security into the rural labour market based on castes. The result highlights that SC labourers suffered most in the rural labour market. Borooah (2010b) evaluated the association of the health with the caste and religion and found that on the health front, SCs condition is not good and they are facing significant exclusion in the government health services. Acharya (2010) also identified similar results in Gujrat and Rajasthan, where the notion of untouchability is stronger than the overall human development. The attitude of the higher caste workers towards low castes is still governed by the customary rules and regulations. Desai et al. (2010) based on IHDS 2005 data identified that discrimination negatively affects the performance of the SC, ST and minorities in the schools. Thorat and Lee (2010) identified that SCs face significant exclusion in cases of the mid-day meal scheme and the public distribution system. Borooah (2010a) pointed out that the discriminatory behaviour prevails in the hiring practices. Iyer et al. (2011) identified that the role of the caste in the economy using the data of economic census of 1990, 1998 and 2005. They found that there is a significant difference between the castes on the platform of the ownership of the entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the study also explored the fact that the workforce share employed in entrepreneurship is also less. Das and Mehta (2012) inferred that SC children face considerable exclusion in schools, and the dropout rate is highest among them. Results reveal that in salaried jobs, a large number of SCs are employed only in fourth-class jobs. Furthermore, the study also found that SCs have fewer networks than higher castes. Sharma (2015) evaluated the association of the standard of the living gap of higher castes with the victimization of the SCs/STs using NCRB data. The results of the study indicate that inequality in society leads to higher crimes in society. Increasing inequality and atrocities against the SCs make their life difficult. Dreze (2017) found that large socio-economic resources of the economy whether in government or in private sector are controlled by the higher castes except for the reserved portion; this shows the clear visibility of the caste-based exclusion in the society. So, caste-based exclusion is very deep into the Indian society and economy.

A few research gaps identified on the basis of literature are, first, there is a dearth of research on social exclusion in Haryana, although the study of social exclusion is growing day by day in our country. Social exclusion–based studies are very scarce in social science research. Second, caste is the main factor in regulating the socio-economic resources of the society and economy in rural areas, but the empirical studies at the ground level are not in significant numbers. Third, many studies of social exclusion are based on secondary data sources, primary data-based studies are fewer in number. Finally, Fatehabad district has the highest SC population, lowest literacy and highest poverty among the SCs in the state, so the study was essential.

Objectives

The all-embracing goal of this study is to explore the responsible factors of social exclusion, which affect SCs most. Moreover, the study also aims to present an overview of the socio-economic characteristics of the SCs.

Research Methodology

This article is explorative cum descriptive in nature, because it explores the concept of social exclusion and presents the views of SCs about social exclusion. From the approach point of view, this article is based on a deductive approach; hence, this is a quantitative study. Moreover, this is also a cross-sectional study. The sample was collected from the rural area of the Fatehabad block of the Fatehabad District of Haryana. Haryana is a northwestern state of India. The total population of the state, according to the census 2011, is 25,353,081. About 65.21% live in rural areas and 34.79% live in urban areas. SCs constitute 20.17% of the total population, of which 72.80% reside in rural areas and 27.20% live in urban areas. The state has 22 districts. Of these, Fatehabad was selected purposively because this block has the highest population of the SCs in the state (30.19%). Further, among all the districts of the state, Fatehabad district has the lowest literacy except Mewat (DCHB, 2011) and has third highest below-poverty-line SC population, 61.92% except Sirsa and Hisar. So, the illiteracy, poverty and population nexus of the district encouraged the researchers to conduct the study of SCs in the district. The sampling units for the present study were scheduled caste household heads of the age group 18–65 years. The total population of the block according to the census 2011 is 54,994 persons and the total number of households in the state is 10,660. The total numbers of the villages in the block are 47(DCHB, 2011). The sample was drawn by employing the Taro Yemen Formula and Sampling Calculator. These instruments suggested 400 as the sample size but for making the data more accurate, reliable and valid, it is recommended to choose higher sample size because there is a negative relationship between the margin of error and sample size. Therefore, to do away with outliers and missing values, it was proposed to take a sample of approximately 500 respondents rather than 400. So, the sample size of 500 was considered good, and data were collected accordingly. Using proportionate stratified sampling, 47 villages were divided into the three strata, highest-populated villages (HPV) (16 villages), middle-populated villages (MPV) (16 villages) and least-populated villages (LPV) (16 villages; first villages repeated was here). The sample composition from each stratum was 358.37 HPV stratum, 103.90 MPV stratum and 37.72 LPV stratum, respectively. From each stratum four villages were selected; hence a total of 12 villages were selected. Then each stratum population was divided by 4 (i.e. by a number of villages) to get a sample size to be selected from each village. Hence, in this way, we selected 89 respondents from HPV, 26 from MPV and 10 from LPV, respectively. However, only 486 interview schedules were found to be fit for analysis and 14 interview schedules failed to provide the necessary details. And, therefore, they were excluded from the final sample and the effective sample size remained 486. Data sources were both primary and secondary. Primary data were collected through the structured interview schedule. The structured interview schedule was divided into two sections, the first part was related to the socio-economic profile of the respondents and the second part was dedicated to social exclusion. The second section of the research instrument was based on the Likert scale. For the reliability test, to check the internal consistency between the multiple variables of the interview schedule, the Cronbach coefficient alpha test used. The alpha value close to one indicates the greater reliability of the instrument and depicts higher commonality among the items. The recommended value is 0.60. The reliability result of the 40 items of social exclusion came to be 0.905, which is far better than the recommended value; hence, items are internally consistent. Secondary data sources of the study were census 2011, socio-economic and caste census 2011, BPL note 2009 and so on. To obtain the results, descriptive statistics and factor analysis technique was used.

Results

Results are presented in two sections: the first section presents an overview of the socio-economic profile of the household heads and the second section explains the factors of social exclusion which are mostly affecting SCs.

Socio-economic Profile of Household Heads

It is essential to know about the nature and features of the sample. Without knowing the features of data, these cannot be properly analysed. In the socio-economic profile, family size, housing status, education level, occupation of the household head and total monthly income of the households are considered for the evaluation of the socio-economic status. Family size is a major indicator to show the social status, where small family size depicts the modernity and large family size is considered as orthodox. Housing condition shows both social and economic status. Further, it also depicts the assets of the household which it may have. Education level shows the chances of a person to grow in society, of becoming a skilled human capital in society and in the economy. Occupation of the household heads tells about the earning source from where he/she sustains his life. Landholding is a significant indicator to present the socio-economic status in the rural society. Income of the households from all sources shows the economic status. It also represents the financial soundness of the households. Socio-economic profile of the SC households is presented in Table 1.

Table 1 shows that a large number of the SC household heads are at the lower socio-economic position. Large family size (more than 70%), meagre income (75%), no permanent source of income, i.e. no landholding (78%), occupation as manual labourers, unemployed (nearly 80%), low educational standard and not having concrete/pucca houses (73%) are the common characteristics of the SCs, which make their lives more miserable. The table also indicates that high dropout rates after higher secondary education, working in the highly exploitable and no wage security-based activities and poverty are still prevalent among the SCs. This table points towards the significant socio-economic exclusion of the SCs in the society.

Table 1.

Socio-economic Profiles of SC Household Heads

N = 486 (SC Household Heads)
#	Frequency	Percentage
Family size
1. Up to 2 2. Up to 4 3. Up to 6 4. Up to 8 5. 9 and above	18 98 223 120 27	3.8 20.1 45.9 24.7 5.5
Housing status
1. Hut 2. Mud house 3. Semi concrete house 4. Concrete house 5. Advance house	17 130 223 105 11	3.5 26.8 45.9 21.6 2.2
Education level
1. Illiterate 2. Up to middle 3. Up to higher secondary 4. Graduate and above	107 195 138 46	22.0 40.1 28.4 9.5
Occupational status
1. Unemployed 2. Manual labour/sharecropper/ shepherd/caste-based occupation/vendor 3. Farmer/tenants/self-employed/dairy 4. Govt. job holder/businessman/doctor	89 302 74 21	18.2 62.1 15.3 4.3
Landholdings (acre)
1. No land 2. Up to 1 acre 3. Up to 5 acres 4. Up to 10 acres	381 79 21 5	78.4 16.3 4.3 1.0
Income level of the household (monthly in ₹)
1. Up to 5,000 2. Up to 10,000 3. Up to 20,000 4. Up to 40,000	286 87 62 51	58.9 18.0 12.8 10.3

Source: Field study.

Factors of Social Exclusion

To identify the traits of social exclusion, factor analysis was fit for the study. Factor analysis is a data reduction technique for identifying a group of variables. Before moving for factor analysis, this is mandatory that we know about the data suitability and sphericity in the data. For this motive, we tested the data for suitability and sphericity with the help of KMO and Bartlett test. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) tells about the data suitability and Bartlett test about the sphericity in the data. KMO value lies between 0 and 1. The recommended value for KMO is 0.60, and the value close to 1 represents the best value. Here the KMO value is 0.866, which means our data are suitable for factor analysis. The null hypothesis for the Bartlett test of sphericity is that there is no association among the variables in the data. Here, the null hypothesis of the Bartlett test is rejected as P value is less than 0.05 (0.000) and we can conclude that there is an association among the variables in the data and thereby we can move for factor analysis. So, both KMO and Bartlett test direct for factor analysis. A very common method for factor analysis is the principal component analysis. In principal component analysis, variables are rotated in such a way that the correlation within the factors maximizes and minimizes across the factors.

How many factors will be extracted from factor analysis can be known by two criteria: latent root criterion and scree plot criterion. According to the latent root criterion, only those factors having latent roots or eigenvalues greater than one are considered significant; otherwise, they should be ignored (Hair et al., 2006). Hair et al. (2006) indicate that the latent root criterion can be measured as the most reliable method when the number of variables is between 20 and 50. A latent root criterion presents 32 of 40 variables into seven main factors, which explain 76% of the variance in the data. The cumulative per cent above 60 is understood as a good result (Hair et al., 2006). Principal component analysis does not count those factors which have less than one eigenvalue, because less than one means the factor is as good as a variable under study; it does not explain the high variance. Hence, seven factors explain 76% of the variance in the data.

Another criterion for factor extraction advocated by Cattel is the scree plot. The scree plot plots each eigenvalue against the components, which is depicted in Figure 1. The cut-off point for factor extraction is the point of inflexion which is the point where the slope of the line changes dramatically. Left points towards the left of point of inflexion are considered as retained factors. Here, seven factors are extracted from factor analysis. Extracted factors influencing the SCs most are labour market, social relation, banking and finance, social environment, participation, public utilities based exclusion and poverty. Table 2 presents a detail description of the factors of social exclusion.

Figure 1.

Source: Computed result of Eigenvalue against components.

Table 2.

Factors of Social Exclusion

Factors	Name of Sub-dimension	Factor Loading
Labour market	‣ Compared with other higher caste, lower caste worker/employee is treated less skilled or either ignored in the workplace? ‣ Compared with another caste, lower caste people cannot start new shops/enterprises because higher caste people create barriers in the path? ‣ Compared with another caste, a lower caste person gets lower wages? ‣ Compared with another caste, your chance of getting a job is less? (except reservation) ‣ Do you agree that compared with other higher castes, you get a lower price (of your goods) in the market? ‣ Landholdings are mostly in favour of higher caste people. ‣ Money makes money but we have less income and wealth. ‣ Small and medium businesses are mostly in favour of a higher caste.	0.728 0.755 0.869 0.811 0.680 0.799 0.798 0.787
Social relation	‣ The separate locality of your caste shows your social cutting from the mainstream of the society? ‣ The caste system is the main barrier to making interrelations between castes? ‣ You celebrate festivals with other castes’ people in society (not within the caste). ‣ You think that caste standard matters in making social relations. ‣ Your relations with police administration are friendly; they don’t discriminate by caste and social relation. ‣ Atrocities against SCs are the main barrier to making social relations strong.	0.815 0.798 0.768 0.835 0.805 0.813
Banking and finance	‣ In banks activities (A/C opening, loan taking etc. time) caste does matter? ‣ You have adequate savings to cover the loss of income or for an emergency? ‣ You are fully insured?	0.844 0.794 0.834
	‣ Do you think that compared with other higher caste Mahajan/landlords take higher interest from lower caste group? ‣ Banking and financial systems are far from taking equity and equality in the society or the people. ‣ You face exclusion/discrimination in financial inclusion services of the bank.	0.670 0.812 0.771
Public utilities	‣ Compared with other castes, healthcare facilities and care (doing by healthcare employees) are in favour of higher caste? ‣ Public services are mostly in favour of the higher caste people (sports centre, transport, sanitation etc.)? ‣ Compared with another caste, your chances of receiving govt. aids and welfare are fewer in the village? ‣ You are aware of the legal aid services of the state.	0.983 0.984 0.984 0.984
Poverty	‣ The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer? ‣ Poverty is the main barrier to getting prosperous? ‣ Because of poverty, you face exclusion in the society?	0.981 0.978 0.979
Participation	‣ Do you agree that your caste determines your social position in society? ‣ Due to your lower caste identity, you are excluded.	0.983 0.981
Social environment	‣ Do lower caste people get harassed by caste abuses? ‣ The caste system has become the root of the cause of conflict in society? ‣ The caste system is the main cause of division among the people in society?	0.642 0.615 0.701
Extraction method: Principal component analysis. Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser normalization. Rotation converged in seven iterations.

Source: Computed result based on rotated component matrix.

Discussion and Conclusion

The exploration of the social exclusion factors which affect SCs most is important for making inclusive development realistic and assuring social justice for all. Since 1950, the republic year of India, justice, liberty and equality remain the key issues of the nation. The 11th and 12th five-year plans were focused on inclusive growth. Social exclusion is a major challenge in the way of achieving fast and rapid inclusive development. Although in recent years social exclusion came out to be a vibrant issue, the scientific research related with this field is still scarce in social science–based research in India (Thorat & Sadana, 2010). Historically deprived and tortured SCs remain at the margins of the society. Many studies identified caste as a dominant cause of exclusion but very few studies talk about the various facets of caste-based exclusion, which makes the trap of exclusion and accelerates exclusion force.

This study has shown various factors which affect the SCs and force them to live miserably. The nexus of the socio-economic characteristics of the households and the identified factors proves this fact. The factors of social exclusion extracted with the help of principal components are labour market, social relation, poverty, banking and finance, social environment, public utilities and deprivation. Participation—this is the crucial factor of exclusion which directly affects the socio-economic life of the SCs. Caste shows the positional status in the society. Lower caste identity deprives SCs from becoming the full members of the society and from enjoying the socio-economic resources. Participation assures the full membership and power of the utilization of the socio-economic resources. Hence, full participation is yet a dream of the SCs. Public utilities—exclusion from the public utilities shows the disempowered state of the SCs. Unequal distribution and corruption at the grassroots level foil the inclusive policies. Higher castes receive all the benefits provided by the government due to their power and networks and lower castes continue to remain in a dark state. Schools, health centres, water, electricity, sports centres, concrete streets etc. are mostly hubs in favour of the higher castes. Unawareness about the government schemes and aids is also a big barrier for accelerating the inclusion at a local level. Poverty—poverty is both cause and consequence of exclusion. Increasing inequality also creates obstacles to address exclusion issues. Poverty among SCs is very serious. Labour market—SCs face exclusion in the labour market as well. Lower castes have lower probability of getting formal jobs. SC labour force remains on the target of lower wages and late payment. SC workers are either treated as less skilled or ignored at the workplace. In starting a new business, lower castes often face barriers from higher castes. Landholdings are concentrated mostly in the hands of higher castes. Large, medium and small enterprises are also the monopolies of the higher castes. Therefore, inequality and exclusion are the main features of the Indian labour market. Social relation—in rural areas, caste-based localities can be easily identified. Lower castes always reside in the outer periphery of the villages. Lower castes have experienced segregation from the mainstream society since time immemorial. One cannot marry out of one’s caste. The situation becomes worse when a lower caste individual wants to marry a higher caste girl and vice-versa. SCs have a lower chance to get help from the higher castes in tough situations. So, caste is a major barrier to making better social relations in society. Records of the study also identify the bitter truth that police also have a discriminatory behaviour against SCs. Increasing atrocities also harass the goal of justice and create obstacles in making social relations strong. Banking and finance—caste is also a strong power to get the benefits of the banking activities. This is often reported that lower castes have lower chances to get a loan from the local or the formal financial institutions. The local financial sources such as landlord and Mahajan (merchant community) charge high interest rates from the SCs and thereby are highly exploited. Due to their lower socio-economic status, they are unable to save for their tough times. Banking and financial institutions working at the grassroots level are full of discrimination. Social environment—SCs are harassed by caste abuses or taboos and always live in fears of losing their dignity. Lower castes are always treated inferior. The fear of caste–based conflict cannot be ignored. Higher, lower; superior, inferior always remains in the mouth, and caste determines all this. SCs live life in the pressures of higher castes. Therefore, the social environment can be destroyed by caste-based discrimination.

According to the previous studies, factors of social exclusion were, Levitas writes about the labour market base exclusion that ‘this domain is relevant to all age groups’ (Levitas, 2006; Levitas et al., 2007). Work life and poverty both have a significant reaction to each other (Baily, 2006). Services also affect our well-being and are relevant to all age groups (Levitas, 2006). Higher poverty among SCs (Borooah, 2010; Byrne & Chakravarti, 2009; Das & Mehta, 2012; Sharma, 2015) is also a key factor of exclusion, because fewer employment opportunities or employment-based exclusion accelerates poverty among SCs. Poverty outcomes are also greatly affected by social norms, values and customary practices that, within the family, the community or the market, lead to exclusion of women, ethnic and social groups, or the society disadvantage. Participation of a particular social group in the society is also a key factor; only due to the lower identity they face exclusion and deprivation from the mainstream society’s life (Thorat & Sabharwal, 2010). This factor of exclusion mainly focuses on the separate localities and untouchability. ‘The participation of Dalit communities as ‘Untouchable’ in the caste structure was the most important factor that historically led to their exclusion from knowledge and education in traditional Hindu society’ (Nambissan, 2010). The social environment is a factor of exclusion because it is still characterized by the existence of traditional Hindu society customary rules (Dreze, 2017; Mamgain, 2014), higher atrocities on SCs and higher dominance of higher castes in administration depict this fact. Acharya writes about the attitudinal aspect of SCs that they face: ‘Attitude towards the low caste users is still governed by customary notions of their social status and notion of purity’ (Acharya, 2010). The accessibility of the banking, finance and social relations is also a key factor of social exclusion because living standards and happiness have direct links to these factors. The impact of the social exclusion factors is consistent with what was documented in previous studies (Borooah, 2010).

In addition to the factors of social exclusion, this study reports an overview of the socio-economic profile of SCs and concludes that they have lower socio-economic status. These factors of social exclusion put SCs into the trap of miserable life. Results of the socio-economic status and recorded factors present a picture that there is a strong relationship between the lower socio-economic life and social exclusion. Identified factors make a mechanism of exclusion trap in which each factor mutually reinforces each other and SCs people continue to remain poor and margins in the society.

The empirical enquiry of the factors of social exclusion supposed to have policy implication both on academic and policy grounds. On the academic front, this study advocates that social exclusion is a big problem not only for the SCs but also for the development of the nation. This study identifies the labour market, social relation, banking and finance, poverty, social environment and participation as the key factors of social exclusion. This research presents a nexus between social exclusion factors and lower socio-economic condition of the SCs. On the policy front, this study presents a picture of the causes of interconnected problems which are playing a negative role in making the life of the SCs miserable. Moreover, this study emphasizes the scholar community for the closer look at the issue of social exclusion.

India has the largest cultural and regional diversity and disparity so the generalization of the study is not good. So a comparative study between the states is a prerequisite. The study does not cover a large portion of the human development indicators; so, in future studies, they may be considered. For a better understanding of the overall development or of the inclusive development, the measurement of the development among different castes is essential. There is a great scope for the comparative investigation in the future. The present study not covered the inclusive development-based schemes; therefore, for the better understanding the inclusion or exclusion schemes’ influences should be studied. The study covers only the working class of the SCs and excluded women, aged and children from the sample, which also face significant/considerable exclusion in the society. Social exclusion is an experienced-based phenomenon; so there is great essentiality of mixed methods rather than concentrating only on the quantitative approach.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

Acharya

S. S.

(2010). Caste and pattern of discrimination in rural public health care services. In Thorat

& Newman

K. S.

(Eds.), Blocked by caste: Economic discrimination in modern India. Oxford University Press.

Acheampong

I. K.

& Wiafe

E. A.

(2013). The link between poverty and social exclusion in Ghana: An econometric approach. Journal of Art and Social Sciences, 1(2), 103–120.

Akerlof

(1976). The economics of caste and of ret race and other woeful tales. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90(4), 599–617.

Ambedkar

B. R.

(1916). Castes in India: Their mechanism, genesis and development. Paper presented at an Anthropology seminar organized by Dr A. A. Goldenweizer in Columbia University on 9 May 1916. Text first printed in Indian Antiquary, Vol. 41 (May 1917) Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches (1979), Vol I, edited by Vasant Moon, Education Department, Government of Maharashtra.

Ambedkar

B. R.

(1936). Annihilation of caste. In Moon

(Ed.), Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and speeches, Vol. 1. Education Department, Government of Maharashtra.

Ambedkar

B. R.

(1987). Annihilation of caste. In Moon

(Ed.), Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and speeches, Vol. 1. Education Department, Government of Maharashtra.

Baily

(2006). Does work pay? Employment, poverty and exclusion from social relations. In Gordon

, Levitas

, Pantazis

, Patsios

, Payne

, & Townsend

(Eds.), Poverty and social exclusion in Britain. The Policy Press.

Borooah

V. K.

(2010a). Social exclusion and jobs reservation in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 45(52), 31–35.

Borooah

V. K.

(2010b). Inequality in health outcomes in India: The role of caste and religion. In Thorat

& Newman

(Eds.), Blocked by caste: Economic discrimination in modern India. Oxford University Press.

10.

Byrne

, & Chakravarti

(2009). Inequality, power and social exclusion in India. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), SDC Briefing Note, Brief No 5.

11.

Das

M. B.

, & Mehta

S. K.

(2012). Poverty and social exclusion in India: Dalits. World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/26336.

12.

DCHB, Directorate of Census Operations (2011). Haryana, district census handbook Fatehabad, Village and Town Wise Primary Census Abstract (PCA), Census of India, Haryana.

13.

de Haan

(1999). Social exclusion: Towards a holistic understanding of deprivation. Dissemination Note No 2 (April), 14.

14.

Despande Desai

, Adams

D. C.

, & Dubey

(2010). Segmented schooling: Inequalities in primary education. In Thorat

& Newman

(Eds.), Blocked by caste: Economic discrimination in modern India. Oxford University Press.

15.

Deshpande

, & Newman

(2007). Where the path leads: The role of caste in post-university employment expectations. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(41), 4133–4140.

16.

Dreze

(2017). The quiet grip of caste sense and solidarity: Jholawala economics for everyone. Permanent Black.

17.

Estivill

(2003). Concepts and strategies for combating social exclusion. International Labour Office.

18.

Gent

van S.

(2017). ‘Beyond buzzwords: What is ‘inclusive development’? Synthesis report. http://includeplatform.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Final-Inclusive-Development-Report.pdf

19.

Hair

J. F.

, Black

W. C.

, Babin

B. J.

, Anderson

R. E.

, & Tatham

R. L.

(2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

20.

Iyer

, Khanna

, & Varshney

(2011). Caste and entrepreneurship in India. Working Paper 12-028, Harvard Business School.

21.

Johnson

, & Andersen

A. D.

(Eds.). (2012). Learning, innovation and inclusive development: New perspectives on economic development strategy and development aid. Aalborg Universitetsforlag (Globelics Thematic Report, Vol. 2011/2012).

22.

Kumar

(2014). Inequality in India caste and hindu social order. Transcience, 5(1).

23.

Levitas

(2006). The concept and measurement of social exclusion. In Pantazis

, Gordon

, & Levitas

(Eds.), Poverty and social exclusion in Britain: The millennium survey (pp. 29–70). Policy Press.

24.

Levitas

, Pantazis

, Fahmy

, Gordon

, Lloyd

, & Patsios

(2007). The multi-dimensional analysis of social exclusion. Department of Sociology and School for Social Policy.

25.

Lenoir

(1974). Les Exclus: UnFrancaissur Dix. Editions du Seuil.

26.

Madanipour

, Shucksmith

, & Talbot

(2015). Concepts of poverty and social exclusion in Europe. Local Economy, 30(7), 721–741.

27.

Madheswaran

, & Attewell

(2010). Wage and job discrimination in Indian urban labour market. In Thorat

& Newman

(Ed), Blocked by caste: Economic discrimination in modern India. Oxford University Press.

28.

Mamgain

P. R.

(2014). Social exclusion, discrimination and atrocities on scheduled castes in India: The worrying spots and future challenges. Journal of Economic & Social Development, X(1).

29.

Mathieson

, Popay

, Enoch

, Escorel

, Hernandez

, Johnston

, & Rispel

(2008). Social exclusion meaning, measurement and experience and links to health inequalities: A review of literature. WHO Social Exclusion Knowledge Network Background Paper 1.

30.

Nambissan

G. B.

(2010). Exclusion and discrimination in schools: Experiences of Dalit children. In Thorat

& Newman

K. S.

(Eds.), Blocked by caste: Economic discrimination in modern India (pp. 253–286). Oxford University Press.

31.

Room

(Ed). (1995). Beyond the threshold: The measurement and analysis of social exclusion. The Policy Press.

32.

Scoville

J. G. L.

(1991). Towards a model of caste economy. In Scoville

J. G.

(Ed.), Status influences in third world labour markets, caste, gender and custom. DeGruyter.

33.

Sen

(2000). Social exclusion: Concepts, application and scrutiny. Working Paper, Social Development paper No. 1, Asian Development Bank.

34.

Sharma

(2015). Caste-based crimes and economic status: Evidence from India. Journal of Comparative Economics, 43, 204–226.

35.

Silver

(1994). Social exclusion and social solidarity: Three paradigms. International Labour Review, 133, 531–571.

36.

Social Exclusion Unit (SEU) (1997). Social exclusion unit: Purpose, work priorities and working methods.

37.

Thorat

(2007). Economic exclusion and poverty: Indian experience of remedies against exclusion. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and Asian Development Bank (ADB) ADB Headquarters, Manila, Philippines, August 9–10.

38.

Thorat

, & Attewell

(2010). Legacy of social exclusion: A correspondence study of job discrimination in India’ urban private sector. In Thorat

& Newman

(Eds.), Blocked by caste: Economic discrimination in modern India. Oxford University Press.

39.

Thorat

, & Lee

(2010). Food security schemes and caste discrimination. In Thorat

& Newman

(Eds.), Blocked by caste: Economic discrimination in modern India. Oxford University Press.

40.

Thorat

, Mahamallik

, & Sadana

(2010). Caste system and pattern of discrimination in rural market. In Thorat

& Newman

(Eds.), Blocked by caste: Economic discrimination in modern India. Oxford University Press.

41.

Thorat

, & Subharawal

S. N.

(2010). Caste and social exclusion: Issues related to concept, indicator and measurement; children, social exclusion and development (Working Paper Series 02(01)). Indian Institute of Dalit Studies (IIDS) and UNICEF.

42.

World Bank (2011). Poverty and social exclusion in India. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446251058.n45