Exclusion and inequality operate along social, civic, political, cultural and economic axes. These dimensions form a self-reinforcing circle. They serve, in essence, as triggers and/or transmission channels. Deprivation in one of them often results in precariousness and marginalization in the rest.

For example, the circle could be set in motion by exclusion from education, including life-long learning, and result in unemployment and overall underperformance in the economic dimension. This factor could, in return, feed into further social service deprivation in terms of health care and/or social protection, reduced participation in political and civic life, and hampered involvement in cultural affairs. 

Such multi-dimensionality and progressivity make inclusion a critical lens for policy design and delivery. They translate into four inclusive policy markers.

There is a general need to improve the ways in which institutions learn, generate and manage locally-produced evidence on inclusion and inequalities. To optimally serve inclusive policy and planning, such evidence should be fit-for-purpose – i.e., increasingly equity-weighted, integrated, multidimensional, timely and policy-sensitive.  Three key considerations elaborate on why and how this can be done.