Women in Politics: Reserved Seats Vis-A-Vis Question of 'Exclusion' and 'Inclusion' (Report‪)‬

Inclusion' is probably the most widely used word that has taken over the minds of people, he it in development sector or as a policy concept, in recent times. Due to the all-pervasive nature that this concept has taken lately, social 'inclusion' has appeared as one of the dominant discourses in current academic sphere. People everywhere discuss about 'inclusion': inclusion of women, dalits (1), indigenous, ethnic communities and other backward groups. The debate of 'inclusion' automatically raises the concept of 'exclusion' or vice versa. The question: 'why inclusion?' arises if there is no exclusion of some kind in existing social institutions or policies. The first point to note is that, despite the gravity of the idea, the terms 'social exclusion' and 'social inclusion' are often used loosely without any conceptual understanding. What factor motivated the infusion of 'inclusion' in Nepal's social context? Who have been excluded? How can they be included? Why do some groups feel the pain of exclusion while some over enjoy power and prestige? With such a deluge of the concept in social sphere, attempts to seek the proper meaning of these terms and their historical development are being made. As Andre Betille (1999) says, when a concept floats extensively within a society, it is the obligation of social analysts to submit it for critical scrutiny, to examine its presuppositions, implications, scope and limits.