Socially Inclusive Cities

Lead Research Organisation: University of Leeds
Department Name: School of Medicine

Abstract

There is increasing awareness that across the world some groups in society are being excluded from opportunities while other groups enjoy unfair advantages. This unjust state of affairs appears to be getting worse rather than better, even in countries where wealth is increasing overall. There is agreement among many international bodies working in low and middle income countries that equality and fairness must be given more priority in future in order to improve the economic wellbeing and life chances of all people in these countries. Failure to do this in the past has led to most people from minority ethnic and religious groups being more likely to have low paid work, to live in slums with risky conditions and to have poorer access to healthcare, education, finance and public transport. People from these populations are also excluded from systems for justice and government and from decision-making about things that affect their lives. This kind of unfairness leads to public unrest and unstable societies.

Public services can be a major influence on how well individuals from ethnic and religious minorities are able to participate in society and be treated as full citizens. Supporting institutions to provide services more effectively to people from such groups is an essential issue for cities that want to be inclusive. This involves political and social challenges, however, as competition for work and resources often drives conflict between ethnic groups. Institutions can also fail to give priority to this issue, especially when statistics they collect to see how well they are doing do not even record ethnic and religious differences.

The Socially Inclusive Cities Network will focus on how research might help reduce these inequalities. We will look at research evidence from across the world on the experiences of people from minority ethnic and religious groups and any ways that public services have tried to reduce unfairness. We will also hold workshops in India, Kenya, Nigeria, Vietnam and the UK with experts on this topic, including voluntary and advocacy organisations that represent people from these populations, policymakers, service professionals and others who can contribute. We will specifically consider the needs of women and young people in minority ethnic and religious groups as they can face additional layers of disadvantage.

Workshop participants will discuss the evidence available as well as gaps in knowledge and what further research might help move things forward. We will identify common issues across different public services and factors that apply to specific institutions and we will focus on what might help change things. We are especially interested in minority ethnic or religious populations that experience the highest levels of social exclusion in low and middle income countries. We also want to identify strategies that can be used across different services within a city so that things change across the board and help create 'inclusive cities'.

Planned Impact

Network participants will coproduce a transformational future research agenda based on a robust process involving key stakeholders at local, national and international levels. Network activity will model egalitarian social relationships and increase the social capital of people from minority ethnic and religious groups and groups representing their interests. Workshops will stimulate knowledge exchange and increase awareness and understanding of evidence-based approaches to social inclusion. Learning opportunities will be facilitated between institutions supporting practitioners and policymakers to move beyond disciplinary and sector boundaries. The multidisciplinary nature of the Network will involve academics in drawing on and contributing to diverse streams of literature and developing future research proposals with significant policy and practice impact,. Early career and doctoral researchers will benefit from capacity-building and networking opportunities such as international exchange visits, workshop facilitation and evidence synthesis. The strengthened individual and organisational capacity facilitated by the Network will support continued engagement between Network members after project funding ends.

Country and global evidence syntheses will be early outputs disseminated nationally and internationally. During the course of Network activity we will disseminate reports, briefings and academic papers describing findings and implications for policy and practice, including findings likely to resonate with other ODA-eligible countries. We will draw on Network members' previous extensive experience of dissemination and also work with non-academic partners to produce accessible summaries, and other outputs they may suggest, of value to policymakers, practitioners, NGOs and people from minority ethnic and religious groups.

Dissemination will target a variety of audiences and promote adoption of the innovative research agenda at local, national and international levels. We will also promote robust institutional strategies for social inclusion of minority ethnic and religious groups, particularly where multiagency, multidisciplinary approaches have been identified. We will aim to achieve high level takeup of these strategies through involvement of policy and practice partners in national and international workshops. This involvement will also ensure the research agenda developed aligns with policy and practice priorities.

Outputs will be made available on a project website and on websites of all partner organisations and we will exploit links to other research projects and networks that we have identified during the course of our activity or already work with such as African Council for Communication Education (ACCE) and Society for Peace Studies & Practice (SPSP). We will promote the project, guidance and findings through relevant international conferences and will aim to organise our international workshops at such conferences as the Health Systems Global symposium as well as conferences relating specifically to development, policing, economics, poverty, ethnicity, gender and young people and through the multidisciplinary Leeds Inequalities Research Network.
 
Description Our future research agenda was developed from a global and four country-specific literature reviews and engagement with 247 expert participants, involving 22 workshops across India, Kenya, Nigeria, Vietnam and the UK (Mir et al 2018; Bhojani et al 2018; Mitulllah et al 2018; Duong et al 2018; Uzochukwu et al 2018). We explored these various sources of evidence in order to identify current knowledge and evidence gaps in relation to:
· key drivers of ethnic and religious exclusion globally and in 4 specific countries eligible for Official Development Assistance (ODA-eligible countries)
· strategies for the inclusion of minority ethnic and religious groups in four public service areas: education, health, local government and police services.
· intersectional disadvantage: the additional impact of gender, age and migration1
Our future research agenda focuses on how research could play a role in social inclusion, defined as comparable access to, representation in and quality of public services for ethnic and religious groups that currently experience disadvantage in society. A graphic representation of the agenda has been developed and a summary of each element of the agenda is provided below with:

CONCEPTUAL UNDERPINNINGS:
We conceptualise social inclusion as a human right to equitable treatment in society and exclusion as a denial of this right that both creates and maintains disadvantage. Such disadvantage can affect the life chances of individuals and communities directly and also have indirect repercussions on future generations of people from minority ethnic and religious groups. Public services are conceptualised as potential mechanisms for the wider social inclusion of disadvantaged ethnic and religious groups and we suggest that if equitable access, representation and outcomes can be achieved simultaneously in key public service contexts, this could have a positive effect on social inclusion within society as a whole.
Our global review found a lack of research in ODA-eligible countries identifying which ethnic or religious groups experience social exclusion and the kinds of marginalisation that exist (Mir et al 2018). In the context of multi-ethnic states and 'superdiversity', ethnicity is a dynamic and fluid concept with evolving and diverse definitions in different settings; religious and ethnic identities may also be more or less relevant in particular contexts. Religious groups may be made up of multiple sects that are or are not afforded state recognition as needing particular attention to overcome social exclusion.

In some contexts, geography can make a huge difference to whether someone from a particular ethnic or religious background is part of a minority or experiences disadvantage. Our agenda highlights the needs for specific terminology to define ethnic and religious groups that experience exclusion, so that interventions are focused on those that most need support. Within this we highlight intersectional disadvantage - the additional layers of exclusion that can be experienced because of gender, migration and age - and the need for this to be explicitly addressed.

We also promote attention to the multilayered and interconnected factors affecting exclusion from public services. This reflects our finding that key drivers of exclusion for people from disadvantaged ethnic and religious communities exist at different levels: the social and political context (macro level), institutional practice (meso level) and at the level of the individual (micro level) (Mir et al 2018). Macro level interventions were considered by many workshop participants to be vital to effecting real change.

RESEARCH THEMES:
1 Achieving equity; understanding the dynamics of change
There is a need to better understand how different stakeholders, particularly key influencers of public services, identify and explain inequalities. How are these understandings influenced by historical and social processes? Where negative understandings exist, how can these be countered in public services? What are the key indicators of exclusion and of equitable service access, representation and outcomes? Mapping inclusion initiatives to the key drivers of exclusion requires robust theoretical framing and development of theory that can be applied within and across specific country contexts.
There is also a need to ensure that under-represented or 'hardly reached' groups, typically excluded from both research and policy are addressed in future research studies. Some service areas are also very under researched; we found a particular lack of evidence in relation to inclusive policing initiatives, linked to poor policy development and primary data in this area. Where data does not exist, how can research contribute to ensuring the needs of such groups are addressed? For many disadvantaged communities contact with the police may be seen as a last resort and avoided, especially for particular types of crime and because of how the police operate. In Nigeria, access to the police and courts are considered out of reach by victims of crime who are poor because this is seen to require money. Evidence from NGOs or ex-police officers about the experience of disadvantaged communities within police and criminal justice systems and their ideas for the kinds of interventions needed to improve this experience may be a helpful first step in this area.

2 Multilevel, multiagency interventions
Multifaceted interventions at macro, meso and micro levels are needed to address the complexity of disadvantage experienced by some ethnic and religious groups. The cumulative impact of disadvantage experienced simultaneously across different public services adds to this complexity. Multidisciplinary, multisector studies and the development of interventions that can work across contexts and diverse policy areas would address the way in which disadvantage is experienced more closely than approaches dealing with a fragmented aspect of this experience.
'All stakeholder' collaboration across sectors and disciplines is helpful to such research and this in turn demands a specific set of skills including leadership, understanding of community and service cultures and social and political awareness. Examples of research questions relating to this theme are: what kinds of equity issues or challenges would facilitate collaboration and be prioritised by stakeholders from diverse sectors? What are the most effective gateways for engaging public service providers on such issues? What do effective multi-sector initiatives look like, and how do these vary by context? How can NGOs work successfully with government agencies and other public services on a long-term basis and what contributes to, or detracts from, the effectiveness of such collaborations?

3 Policy development and the political context
The role of policymakers, public service providers, excluded communities and other social groups in policy development needs to be better understood: how accessible are legal and political processes to those from disadvantaged ethnic and religious groups and what political opportunities or barriers exist that can support or prevent effective social inclusion?
Political tensions affect research in all four public service areas to which this agenda relates but are particularly noticeable in relation to local government and police services, where there are huge gaps in research evidence globally. The political sensitivity of such research may explain why ethnic and religious exclusion is so under-researched in ODA-eligible contexts. Ways of reducing the fear and sensitivity surrounding such research and legitimising work in this field are needed. An incremental approach, building on what is considered feasible in specific contexts can potentially be helpful.

Migrants, Muslim communities, and NGOs that represent their interests, may be particularly affected by the focus on extremism adopted by government and police institutions, influencing the extent to which these institutions are prepared to engage as well as their terms for engagement. Poor representation of disadvantaged community members in positions of power is compounded within institutions by a 'risk averse' culture towards communities stigmatised by government policies on counter terrorism or immigration, which undermines effective engagement. These populations are particularly affected by the misrepresentation of religious and ethnic minorities in the media, particularly social media, and in decision-making spaces, which helps to maintain and reinforce social inequalities. Questions on this issue include: how can local government and other public services become more receptive to unpopular or underrepresented voices? What is the relationship between political leaders' ethnic and/or religious affiliation and actions or attitudes towards those from different ethnic or religious backgrounds? How does greater accountability impact on the activities of government functionaries and on corrupt or discriminatory practices?

The policy context is also pertinent to exploring the effective use of research evidence by policy makers and by excluded communities, in which research can potentially be used as a lever to influence policy. Are some marginalised groups more able or willing to access and use research and other evidence than others? A further key issue is the inadequate implementation of inclusion policies and antidiscrimination laws that already exist in many contexts. Research is needed that improves our understanding of the mechanisms by which effective implementation can be achieved and how to reduce implementation barriers.

4 Research methods

a) Robust design
Research designs and methods are needed that support the evaluation of initiatives tackling macro, meso and micro level drivers of exclusion; case study methods are considered a particularly helpful approach for paying simultaneous attention to all these levels. In addition, impact that is built into research design, as in action research studies, is considered vital by NGOs in ODA-eligible country contexts.

There is also a need to evaluate existing initiatives more effectively to enable better understanding of the specific reasons why interventions work or not and who they benefit. Measures to establish the dynamics of change would contribute to enhancing the quality of studies in this area. For example, can we establish a 'standard' approach that will enable us to recognise 'success' in different national contexts? How would such standardisation accommodate different forms of knowledge, especially knowledge within excluded communities, and the need for contextual and experience-focused approaches?

b) Inclusive, reflexive research
Research itself needs to model the kind of collaboration with members of excluded communities that we have recommended for public services. Key considerations or principles for such engagement include: representation of community advocates from groups involved in the research at all stages of the process; mutual benefits from such engagement and constructive, long-term, rather than tokenistic, relationships. Inclusive approaches are empowering for disadvantaged community members and can be facilitated by co-production and participatory research as well as 'participatory visioning' (Soria-Lara and Banister 2017). Privileging the voice of community participants, who may be involved as co-researchers, challenges assumptions and power-imbalances associated with methods that can replicate social exclusion within the research design. Mutual learning and intercultural dialogue is a significant aspect of such research, involving recognition that everyone involved in the collaboration has valued knowledge to share.

Interventions that increase accountability and civic participation can have significant impact on the representation of disadvantaged ethnic and religious groups in decision-making processes. Research that addresses current barriers to effective involvement of these ethnic and religious groups in research would be helpful, for example, how accessible is research funding from diverse sources for studies supporting the inclusion of such disadvantaged groups, particularly support for participatory approaches and adequate costing? How willing are public institutions to engage in such research? What impact do counter terrorism policies have on engagement between public services (particularly local government and the police), and advocacy groups that actively dissent from such policies?

A challenge to cross country collaboration in this regard is the hugely differential constraints on access and mobility that can apply to people from ODA-eligible countries, particularly NGO activists. Our own experience reflected the common inability of such individuals to gain permissions to travel and the numerous barriers and lengthy processes involved in satisfying the bureaucratic procedures necessary.

CONCLUSIONS
Unequal societies contribute to local, national and international injustice, tensions and instability that ultimately affects the lives of everyone. There are moral, legal and economic reasons for addressing ethnic and religious group inequalities and constructive approaches to exploring how to do so. This future research agenda provides a way forward for promoting greater social ownership of 'inclusive societies'. It is an initial attempt to map out the kinds of research that would help transform the current landscape in which disadvantaged ethnic and religious groups face routine discrimination and exclusion globally. We recommend that the agenda should be reviewed and updated annually in the light of what we hope will be a greater body of research evidence situated in ODA-eligible contexts. With support from funding agencies, we anticipate that work linked to this research agenda can play a key role in reducing social inequalities that are both avoidable and unjust.
APPENDIX 1: REFERENCES

Bhojani U 2018 Enhancing social inclusion of (ethnic and religious) minorities in public services Institute of Public Health, Bengalaru.
Duong D, Ha B, Mir G 2018 Socially Inclusive Cities: Vietnam Country Report
Kenya Ministry of Devolution And Planning 2013 Millennium Development Goals
Lennox C 2010 Religious minorities and the Millennium Development Goals
http://minorityrights.org/wp-content/uploads/old-site-downloads/download-844-
Religious-minorities-and-the-Millennium-Development-Goals.pdf
Mir et al 2018 'Achieving SDG 10: A Global Review of Public Service Inclusion Strategies for Ethnic and Religious Minorities' United Nations Research Institute for Social Development
Mitulllah W; Michuki G and Ouma S 2018 Socially Inclusive Cities: Kenya Country Report University of Nairobi, Institute for Development Studies
Sachs J 2012 From Millennium Development Goals to Sustainable Development Goals Lancet 379: 2206-11
United Nations 2015 Review of Millenium Development Goals United Nations
UN Vietnam 2012a Achieveing the MDGs with Equity United Nations
UN Vietnam 2012b http://www.un.org.vn/en/un-in-the-news9/160-general/1794-unin-
the-news-vietnams-minorities-more-likely-to-be-poor.html United Nations
Aguilar, Mario. Muslim-State Relations in Kenya in Muslim Minority-State Relations. Palgrave Macmillan US, 2016. 155-171.
Uzochukwu BSC, Okeke C, Ogwezi J, Onibon F 2018 Socially Inclusive Cities: Nigeria Country Report
Exploitation Route We recommend that the agenda be used in practice as follows:

RESEARCH FUNDERS: To inform future research funding strategies and be adopted and prioritised in these portfolios. To promote research on inclusive practice that can inform public service practice and commissioning. To ensure that research projects, particularly large studies, take account of inequalities experienced by minority ethnic and religious groups at all stages of the research process.
RESEARCHERS: To support development of research proposals with significant policy and practice impact that promote positive change in the lives of peopled from disadvantaged minority ethnic and religious groups. To develop capacity-building opportunities for people from these groups, including recruitment of research students and professionals.
PRACTITIONERS AND POLICYMAKERS: To increase awareness and understanding of the need for change and to promote collaboration with disadvantaged minority ethnic and religious groups within institutions. To ensure that approaches to support inclusion are considered in the context of existing evidence and are acceptable to disadvantaged communities themselves.
ADVOCACY ORGANISATIONS: To lobby for egalitarian relationships that empower people from minority ethnic and religious groups. We hope the agenda will support advocacy groups to work with other stakeholders and develop a critical mass of people who challenge social injustice in public services and influence the adoption of robust strategies for inclusion.
Sectors Communities and Social Services/Policy,Education,Healthcare,Government, Democracy and Justice,Security and Diplomacy

URL https://medicinehealth.leeds.ac.uk/directories0/dir-record/research-projects/979/socially-inclusive-cities
 
Description The PI has recently been invited to join a United Nations Expert Group on SDG10 hosted by the World Bank and the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). She will feed into a two-day preparatory meeting, opened by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and former President of Chile, Ms. Michelle Bachelet, to set the narrative of the UN High-Level Political Forum on "Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality" in July 2019. We have expanded involvement in the Network from five countries (India, Kenya, Nigeria, UK and Vietnam) to other international experts based in Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, Taiwan and Turkey as well as to others conducting research in a wide range of other ODA-eligible contexts. Our work has provided a platform for those wishing to counter current patterns of social exclusion in which ethnicity and religious identity can determine access to education, health care, governance and criminal justice systems. This is a neglected area in terms of SDG action and our national workshops and dissemination activity have significantly raised the profile of these issues. In Vietnam, partners have secured funding from the Ministry of Ethnic Minority Affairs to conduct research on the needs of the country's numerous minority ethnic groups. This is likely to influence future policy and practice, given that the funder is a key policymaking body. A conversation has also been started, led by a prestigious University of Public Health in Vietnam with links to influential stakeholders, on the issue of religious exclusion, which is an extremely sensitive area in terms of policy and public services, particularly local government and policing. Our dissemination activity has been used to highlight the current persecution of minorities eg in India and Nigeria, which have established and longstanding policies on religious minorities and the continuing need to address religious discrimination and potential for conflict that this promotes. In India our workshops have led to the establishment of the Health Equity Network India (HENI) which will promote findings from our project and further develop this work. Our national and international workshops have brought together NGOs representing excluded communities, public service practitioners and policymakers and academics from ODA-eligible countries to discuss and develop current evidence, expanding the social capital and knowledge of all participants involved. We have promoted the inclusion of disadvantaged ethnic and religious groups in economic development and welfare initiatives across partner countries by identifying evidence-based and currently used potential strategies for social inclusion that have been evaluated during national workshop discussions and that have the potential to be implemented. International workshops have been extremely helpful in highlighting diverse policy approaches to inclusion and considering the transferability of these to the different contexts of ODA-eligible countries. An accessible animation with subtitles in Hindi and Vietnamese is being promoted by network members to explain how exclusion of minority ethnic and religious groups occurs, its consequences for everyone and what can be done to counter such exclusion. Stills and short pieces from this on social media have been used as a way of promoting and supporting inclusive policy, practice and research. Other academics working on inequalities in Brazil and in 'fragile states' who saw the animation during a United Nations conference presentation have requested access and shown the animation to their teams in order to influence their own work Co-investigators and network members from ODA-eligible countries have benefitted from capacity building and networking opportunities such as facilitating, speaking or attending national and international workshops and support to develop evidence synthesis and publications. NGO staff and early career researchers have been given specific opportunities to lead on outputs from the project, leading on publications in India, Vietnam and Kenya, contributing to evidence gathering in Nigeria and to a UN 'Humans of My World' case study on the Nubian community in Kenya. Further capacity development opportunities have been provided for a range of relevant stakeholders involved in the project as follows: SOCIALLY EXCLUDED ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS MINORITIES AND GROUPS REPRESENTING THEIR INTERESTS: Network participants from these groups have engaged to coproduce a transformational future research agenda based on a robust process involving key stakeholders at local, national and international levels. Network activity has modelled egalitarian social relationships and increased the social capital of people from minority ethnic and religious groups and groups representing their interests. For example, advocacy organisations and representatives of ethnic minorities from tribal/remote areas in India and Vietnam and religious minorities in Nigeria and Kenya were specifically targeted to contribute as presenters at workshops in these countries and during dissemination activities. In all country contexts NGOs took the lead in ensuring the voice of people from excluded communities was adequately represented in discussions and project outputs; NGO collaborators and partners have contributed to publications in Kenya and India. A writing workshop to support early career researchers, NGOs and others involved in publications was held towards the end of the project to aid the development of publication skills and partners have shared publication drafts with each other during and following this. Such skills are important for research capacity building and career development of these individuals. A number of Vietnamese NGOs have attended international workshops and contribute to discussions about cross country themes arising from these. We have also encouraged the Pamoja Trust, an established and well resourced NGO, to support the Nubian Rights Forum, a smaller group run by and for an excluded ethnic and religious minority population in Kenya, to develop a UN resource highlighting the experience of people within this community. NGOs have been costed in to the project budget to support capacity building and involvement in planning and delivering workshops and project outputs. In the UK organisations representing minority ethnic and religious groups internationally or in the UK were similarly targeted, including Arkan, a Rohingya organisation representing Muslims in Myanmar and GATE, an advocacy organisation for gypsies and travellers in the UK. Engagement between a wide range of relevant stakeholders at these workshops has supported 'bonding' between those who experience social exclusion and 'bridging' to individuals and organizations that can help increase access to support and resources. This has led to separate opportunities for NGOs to present their work within public service settings to highlight the need for inclusive approaches. We have ensured that the voice of socially excluded populations and advocacy organisations is privileged in terms of developing the future research agenda. At the same time, the critical mass of influential advocates involved in the Network, including sympathetic policymakers and practitioners has helped ensure a high profile for this activity within each partner country, further challenging social exclusion. We have deliberately sought to involve individuals and organisations that can influence the adoption of strategies for social inclusion identified. PRACTITIONERS AND POLICYMAKERS: Workshops have stimulated evidence based knowledge exchange and increased awareness and understanding of evidence-based approaches to social inclusion amongst a wide range of public service practitioners and policymakers in each context. This has involved presenting review findings for discussion at workshops and also providing a platform to share examples of inclusive practice in these organisations. Discussions have also highlighted factors contributing to inconsistent, poor or discriminatory practice. These events have been an opportunity to promote institutional strategies for social inclusion of minority ethnic and religious groups and the benefits of multiagency, multidisciplinary approaches. High level input from influential individuals to our workshops has helped to build relationships that support uptake of the project findings and recommendations. Learning opportunities have been facilitated within and between institutions supporting practitioners and policymakers to move beyond disciplinary and sector boundaries. The Health Equity Network in India was developed as a result of these workshops and in the UK equality officers from different public service institutions attending the third workshop decided to collaborate on a joint event for National Inclusion Week in the coming year leading to separate planning meetings for this work. ACADEMICS, INCLUDING EARLY CAREER AND DOCTORAL RESEARCHERS. Considerable support and mentoring was provided by Information Specialists at the University of Leeds and other UK team members for evidence reviews conducted in partner countries. Database searches were initially conducted at Leeds and guidance on conducting specialist/country specific searches was provided to supplement the papers that were identified. Innovative formats such as world café and panel interviews for the national workshops were also suggested by the UK team and adopted by country partners. For a number of early career researchers new skills were developed in terms of evidence synthesis and workshop facilitation. The multidisciplinary nature of the Network and its activities has supported academics to draw on and contribute to diverse streams of literature in the fields of education, health, criminal justice, governance and economics, many of which currently pay sparse attention to ethnic and religious inequalities. The future research agenda developed aims to promote research proposals with significant policy and practice impact in a range of areas which can potentially support continued engagement between Network members. Early career and doctoral researchers have benefitted from the ambitious and innovative programme of work, working alongside very experienced colleagues to support their capacity-building and networking opportunities. Links to other networks and large research projects have been made, including three other relevant ESRC strategic networks on education, gender and conflict and inclusive transport and the International Institute for Inequalities at LSE. This has widened individual and research group contacts; we have shared contacts with these Networks, invited attendance at our events and obtained feedback on our project outputs. This has increased the capacity of our whole Network and other networks to make the most effective of our time and resources for the project. Our approach has strengthened individual and organisational capacity among Network members, supporting further partnership work on research proposals likely to have significant policy and practice impact. Dissemination through our strong existing Network of academic, policy and practice and NGO actors who have been involved in a number of Network activities already is likely to promote adoption of the innovative research agenda at local, national and international levels. Have stimulated Equality Leads in the hospital Trust, Local Authority and University in Leeds to collaborate on an Inclusion Week initiative for September 2017
First Year Of Impact 2017
Sector Education,Healthcare,Government, Democracy and Justice,Security and Diplomacy
Impact Types Societal,Policy & public services

 
Description international workshops Kenya, Nigeria and UK
Geographic Reach Multiple continents/international 
Policy Influence Type Participation in a advisory committee
Impact 4 international workshops have stimulated evidence based knowledge exchange and increased awareness and understanding of evidence-based approaches to social inclusion amongst a wide range of public service practitioners and policymakers in each context. This has involved presenting international review findings and examples of inclusive practice for discussion at these workshops . Discussions have also highlighted factors contributing to inconsistent, poor or discriminatory practice. These events have been an opportunity to promote institutional strategies for social inclusion of minority ethnic and religious groups and the benefits of multiagency, multidisciplinary approaches. High level input from influential individuals to our workshops has helped to build relationships that support uptake of the project findings and recommendations. Learning opportunities have been facilitated within and between international partners supporting policymakers to move beyond disciplinary and sector boundaries. Policymakers who have attended have taken back the learning to their respective roles in government, health and other fields. The future research agenda developed aims to promote research proposals with significant policy and practice impact in a range of areas which can potentially support continued engagement between policymakers and other Network members.
 
Description involvement of policymakers and practitionrs in multidiscipinary workshops - India, Kenya, Nigeria, Vietnam and the UK
Geographic Reach National 
Policy Influence Type Participation in a national consultation
Impact Workshops have stimulated evidence based knowledge exchange and increased awareness and understanding of evidence-based approaches to social inclusion amongst a wide range of public service practitioners and policymakers in each context. This has involved presenting review findings for discussion at workshops and also providing a platform to share examples of inclusive practice in these organisations. Discussions have also highlighted factors contributing to inconsistent, poor or discriminatory practice. These events have been an opportunity to promote institutional strategies for social inclusion of minority ethnic and religious groups and the benefits of multiagency, multidisciplinary approaches. High level input from influential individuals to our workshops has helped to build relationships that support uptake of the project findings and recommendations. Learning opportunities have been facilitated within and between institutions supporting practitioners and policymakers to move beyond disciplinary and sector boundaries. The Health Equity Network in India was developed as a result of these workshops and in the UK equality officers from different public service institutions attending the third workshop decided to collaborate on a joint event for National Inclusion Week in the coming year leading to separate planning meetings for this work. The future research agenda developed aims to promote research proposals with significant policy and practice impact in a range of areas which can potentially support continued engagement between Network members.
 
Title Drivers of social exclusion - model to explain and address exclusion of disadvantaged ethnic and religious groups 
Description We developed a model to describe the multilayered and interconnected factors affecting exclusion of disadvanteaged ethnic and religious groups from public services. This reflects our finding that key drivers of exclusion for people from these communities exist at different levels: the social and political context (macro level), institutional practice (meso level) and at the level of the individual (micro level). Macro level interventions were considered by many workshop participants to be vital to effecting real change. 
Type Of Material Model of mechanisms or symptoms - human 
Year Produced 2018 
Provided To Others? Yes  
Impact I have been invited to contribute findings from the project at a two day expert group meeting, Reducing Inequalities: SDG 10 Progress and Prospect taking place April 2 to 3 in Geneva, Switzerland that will set the narrative of the UN High-Level Political Forum on "Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality" later in July. The meeting is hosted by the World Bank and the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) and will be opened by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and former President of Chile, Ms. Michelle Bachelet - , . The draft agenda and other details are attached and available on our website. 
URL http://www.worldbank.org/en/events/2018/12/17/reducing-inequalities-progress-and-prospects
 
Description Socially Inclusive Cities Network partner - Kenya 
Organisation University of Nairobi
Country Kenya 
Sector Academic/University 
PI Contribution Facilitation and development of an international network to explore and raise the profile of ethnic and religious inclusion in public services
Collaborator Contribution Held national and international workshops to facilitate and develop country level activity in relation to the Network's aims. Supported dissemination activities
Impact Kenya country report: Socially Inclusive Cities
Start Year 2017
 
Description Socially Inclusive Cities Network partner - Nigeria 
Organisation University of Nigeria
Country Nigeria 
Sector Academic/University 
PI Contribution Supported/trained partners to review literature, hold innovative workshops, develop country reports and future research agenda and trained/collaborated on writing publications from the project
Collaborator Contribution Carried out all above activities. Held high-level meetings with policymakers to ensure relevance and obtain support for the future agenda, including various Ministries of Health, Education, Minority Affairs and Social Welfare
Impact Country report and future research agenda; two publications in preparation for high impact journals
Start Year 2017
 
Description 3 International workshops 
Form Of Engagement Activity Participation in an activity, workshop or similar
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach International
Primary Audience Other audiences
Results and Impact 3 international workshops bringing together network members to discuss findings across partner countries on: Key Drivers of Exclusion, Social Inclusion Strategies and Intersectionality (Gender, Age and MIgration)
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2017
 
Description 3 national workshops Nigeria 
Form Of Engagement Activity Participation in an activity, workshop or similar
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach International
Primary Audience Other audiences
Results and Impact 3 national workshops on: Key Drivers of Exclusion, Social Inclusion Strategies and Intersectionality (Gender, Age and MIgration)
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2017
 
Description 3 national workshops UK 
Form Of Engagement Activity Participation in an activity, workshop or similar
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Other audiences
Results and Impact 3 national workshops on: Key Drivers of Exclusion, Social Inclusion Strategies and Intersectionality (Gender, Age and MIgration)
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2017
 
Description 4 national workshops - Vietnam 
Form Of Engagement Activity Participation in an activity, workshop or similar
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach National
Primary Audience Other audiences
Results and Impact 4 national workshops on: Key Drivers of Exclusion, Social Inclusion Strategies, Intersectionality (Gender, Age and MIgration) and a Future Research Strategy on Ethnic and Religious Inclusion in Vietnam
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2017,2018
URL http://khxh.huph.edu.vn/vi/page/skss/61
 
Description First National Workshop India 
Form Of Engagement Activity Participation in an activity, workshop or similar
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach International
Primary Audience Other audiences
Results and Impact 3 national workshops on: Key Drivers of Exclusion, Social Inclusion Strategies and Intersectionality (Gender, Age and MIgration)
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2017
 
Description National workshops Kenya 
Form Of Engagement Activity Participation in an activity, workshop or similar
Part Of Official Scheme? No
Geographic Reach International
Primary Audience Other audiences
Results and Impact 4 national workshops on: Key Drivers of Exclusion, Social Inclusion Strategies and Intersectionality (Gender, Age and MIgration) and Future Research Strategy for Kenya
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity 2017