Social Exclusion in the Learning Economy

Abstract

An analysis is made of the impact that the emerging learning economy may have on the processes of social exclusion with the focus on the sphere of work, since employment is seen as the core of the social tie that links individuals within society. The first section of the chapter discusses globalization and the learning economy. Next, the changing patterns of (un)employment (flexible employment, as exemplified by part‐time work, temporary work, home‐working, and self employment) and career structure are addressed that are caused by global competition, moves towards a learning economy, individualization of work in the labour process, and restructuring. The next two sections address first, regional exclusion, and second, social exclusion arising directly from the learning economy as the result of the formation of a new underclass of workers whose knowledge can be codified and automated, so that they become unnecessary. The last three sections address the policy implications of social security, and individual‐targeted and general strategies for combating social exclusion.

ICT Policies as a Means to Inhibit Social Exclusion: The South African Case

“…In a report for the European Community, Schienstock (1999) describes how the digital divide can actually lead to social exclusion. The author argues that a lack of technical skills drives people out of the job market, which is one of the first steps to become socially excluded.…”

Navigation in New Terrain with Familiar Maps: Masterminding Sociospatial Equality through Resource-Oriented Innovation Policy

“…While several contributions within the field of innovation studies ask for policies that embrace the interests and abilities of labor and less favored regions (Guth, 2005;Lundvall, 2002;Lundvall and Lorenz, 2006;Rutherford and Holmes, 2007;Schienstock, 2001), the institutional and political preconditions and processes behind such innovation policies have rarely been studied (Edquist, 2001;Lundvall et al, 2002). This paper explores how political strategies by organized interests confront the competing institutional structures of traditional social corporatism (Katzenstein, 1985) and emergent competition state logics (Jessop, 2002) in innovation policy construction.…”

“…Lundvall (2002) focuses on how less autonomy for workers and greater job insecurity may undermine learning. Schienstock (2001) criticizes the learning economy for having socially exclusionary effects, implicitly linking a focus on innovation to increasing power differentials between employers and employees. Guth (2005) calls for more socially inclusive and participative forms of regional associative governance (as in Cooke et al, 2000) to counteract territorial and social imbalances within the EU.…”

‘The longest day’: ‘flexible’ contracts, performance-related pay and risk shifting in the UK direct selling sector

“…What has been termed 'low road' flexibility refers to a movement towards increasing costcutting, casualization and work intensification within labour markets (Michie and Sheehan, 2003). One feature of this movement towards more deregulated and flexible employment practice has also been the growth of what Schienstock calls 'fictitious self-employment', where workers who are effectively under direct company control are denied the rights, benefits and protections of formal employment by virtue of being deemed nominally independent contractors (Schienstock, 2001). This latter form of flexibility is seen to leave workers with fewer rights and lower levels of security, as their tenure and terms and conditions are revised in line with changing management policies and in response to market conditions.…”