Exclusionary processes operate at different levels, namely, micro (e.g., individual, household), meso (e.g., neighbourhoods, communities), and macro (i.e., nation state and global regions). They can originate at one of these levels and trickle up and down to the other(s) or, in the case of longer-term exclusionary patterns, can be deeply rooted and institutionalized in core structures at all stages.

Girls’ education is a telling example. Developed and developing countries alike have recognized its importance. Yet many countries still lag behind on this account. The interaction between gender and culture is deemed to be one of the powerful factors behind the phenomenon. This intersection is often reflected in prioritization of boys’ education over that of girls’ with differentiated allocation of resources, access, quality etc. In many settings, such dynamics are not taking place at one isolated level. They are, rather, detectable at multiple levels – i.e., those of households, schools, communities and societies at-large. Loosening such multi-layered and contextual constrains at only one of these levels without addressing the rest is neither feasible not sustainable.

This dimension translates into two inclusive policy markers. 

When it comes to cases such as girls’ education, it is not nearly enough to intervene and invest efforts only at one institutional level. Progress is brought about through systemic and coordinated pulls in the direction of inclusion. Three design considerations further elaborate this marker.