"Social exclusion" has increasingly replaced the term "underclass" in social policy debates. Regardless of changes in terminology many of the assumptions that informed the underclass debate remain. These focus on the role of cultural values in transmitting dependent modes of behaviour that have a corrosive impact on the work ethic of the poor. This article begins by exploring the government's current conceptualisation of "social exclusion" as exclusion from paid employment and how this has shaped the appropriate policy response. Following from this, the article will present ethnographic research that examines the responses of a sample of residents on a South London estate to the economic insecurities that they face. These insecurities are intensified by an increasingly coercive welfare system that emphasises "supply side" measures as a panacea for social exclusion. As previous field studies have indicated, many have developed alternative solutions to economic marginality (MacDonald, 1994). At a situational level these may appear more attractive than the more formal routes currently offered. While broadly supportive of the promotion of education and training policies, many felt that these objectives are frequently compromised by more immediate concerns which are located in the respondent's perceptions of social exclusion. From this perspective, such notions may differ markedly from the rather limited version of "social exclusion" that is currently guiding the direction of welfare reform, suggesting the need for a broader definition of social exclusion that encompasses the standards and lifestyles of the surrounding community (Townsend, 1979).
