In the wake of public outrage at the murder of schoolboy Damilola Taylor in Peckham, the finger of blame has been pointed at social exclusion and deprivation as contributory causes for such terrible crimes. In our latest article we look at what's really happening on council estates. Have the attempts to reduce social exclusion really worked or are the problems of inner city estates more deep-seated and likely to be here for good? In future articles we will look in more details at the governments plans to tackle the problems discussed in this article.

Social exclusion is a popular term applied to many forms of disadvantage which are perceived to threaten people's ability to interact and participate in mainstream society. This can include unemployment, poverty, crime, poor vocational skills and lack of education. The debate surrounding social exclusion also centres on the number of communities that are isolated and disadvantaged by economic or social events and government policy.

Social exclusion is all around us. Over 14 million UK residents live below the poverty line (an increase of 12 per cent since 1983) and the situation seems to be getting worse. The government's strategy to overturn 20 years of neglect in deprived areas faces an uphill battle. Many residents on impoverished estates have seen management changes at town halls but no significant improvements to suggest things are genuinely on the up.

With a general election looming, the government has put the objective of tackling social exclusion and neighbourhood renewal near the top of its agenda and news over the last few days indicate that it will also be high on the Conservative agenda. Plenty of financial resources have been allocated in the past, and the increased priority given to these issues would lead us to believe that plenty more will be spent in the future. But the question remains - will such resources prevent many estates tumbling further away from mainstream society?

Major problems have been caused for some communities over the past twenty years through the effect of declining industrial and manufacturing sectors and the corresponding national shift towards a service economy. This has lead to a steady drift of people away from industrial areas in the search for employment and away from deprived inner city estates to safer and cleaner suburbs. This has had led to the further concentration and isolation for those unable to move, living in already deprived neighbourhoods.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has recently completed an investigation into the causes and problems of social exclusion. We now take a look at the findings.

Respondents to the Rowntree investigation were actually reasonably content with where they lived and spent the majority of their time on or close to their own estate. Rather than the long-term implications of their lives, the major concern was living day to day. Relationships with family and friends were considered extremely important as a support network and the estate itself was important, as it was the centre of social life. Unemployment and disrepair on the estate were not seen as particularly important.

This lack of interaction with wider society had created an estate culture where anti-social behaviour, drugs and crime were acceptable. Many see low personal achievement and aspirations as acceptable within a framework where the estate had its own norms to which residents feel strong pressure to conform. This is clearly only going to add to isolation in the long term, as few outsiders will wish to move into such an environment.

Many residents who had been unemployed for the long term cite difficulty in readjusting to working life as a reason for not attempting to get a job. And to many, the only advantage of working was money. Having parents who are employed greatly improved attitudes to working. Unfortunately however, many households are now in their third generation of unemployment.

By far the biggest issue for estate residents across the board was anti-social behaviour and crime. High rates of involvement in crime were common and crucially, crime was tolerated by many residents within limits imposed by estate culture and not those limits set out by the law.

Many residents were also suspicious of local authority and government service providers for estates, choosing not to use the services and resources on offer. Poor quality and a pre-conception that many agencies worked to their own agenda and not for the good of residents were also given as reasons for not using them. Such beliefs, which have been ingrained into residents for decades cannot help the long term chances of any reform programmes that are put in place.

The research also questioned many front line workers, who on balance felt that social exclusion was a product of estate life. Appallingly, many also believed that when councils allocated families to such estates they were effectively condemning a family to fail. They also believe that their ability to tackle the problems was severely constrained by resource limitations.

Thinly spread resources coupled with council budget cuts in some areas have forced the withdrawal of provisions on many estates. This has consequently lead to the demoralisation of front line workers, many of whom believe that problems are getting worse not better.

Understandable though such attitudes are, if those people at the forefront of change do not believe that they can make a difference, why should the residents?

Although there is a malaise in many areas, some residents believe that the time to move on as getting closer. As one woman resident put it, "I grew up here, I've lived here all my life. I like the estate. But if it gets any worse, I'll have to move out."

Whether such estates continue to decline or begin to revive will depend on the cumulative personal decisions of many households. Many people simply do not have the means to leave. But if those with the luxury of choice do go, the difficulty of renewing estate communities will become much greater.

One of the key factors cited as being key to the future improvement of estates is the provision of good quality public services. However, the example of Hackney in London where many public services have been withdrawn due to multimillion pound debts highlights the fact that many councils are struggling to keep with budget constraints. Unless budgets are raised or budget management improves, then it seems that the cutting back of some public services in already deprived areas is almost inevitable. And all this at a time when the number of people vulnerable to social exclusion is on the increase, making the need for effective public service support even greater.

The collapse of blue-collar work in traditional industries has contributed directly to the increasing concentration of poverty and disadvantage on social housing estates. The result is that social housing estates have become poorer places with more jobless households, fewer in work, poorer services and fallen into state of disrepair. Two decades of tight budgetary constraint and internal restructuring have left public services in poor shape to make the step change needed to turn troubled estates around.

Tackling social exclusion is both a national and a local challenge. The Government, through the National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal and the Urban White Paper, has indicated its commitment to solving the deep-seated problems that exist. Mr Blair has also indicated that he is likely to introduce a 'Ministry for the poor' with a department of social inclusion, so named to put the emphasis on positives. But it will take a lot more than a positive name to make sustainable change.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has also contributed to this national effort through its Area Regeneration Programme, which was launched in 1996 and has included over 60 projects, covering most aspects of regeneration policy and practice from the national to the neighbourhood level. But bringing zones of exclusion back into mainstream society and having a lasting impact on life in such areas is a monumental task and a lot more has to be done before we see significant change.