Lifelong learning has the potential to make a signifi cant contribution to poverty
reduction. Research shows that individuals who engage in lifelong learning are more
likely to have better employment opportunities, higher incomes, better health and
greater ability to manage their money. Learning will be most effective in poverty
reduction if it is integrated with other policy measures.

The balance of public funding for lifelong learning for disadvantaged people is
signifi cantly weighted towards the acquisition of skills and qualifi cations designed to
help them gain and sustain employment; other means by which lifelong learning can
contribute to poverty reduction receive much less emphasis in policy, despite the fact
that there is evidence of the effi cacy of a range of other approaches. If lifelong learning
is to make a signifi cant impact on poverty reduction, more approaches are required
that address the full range of needs that people who live in poverty may have. This
calls for attention to be given to how learning can support, not just the development of
human capital, but also social capital and a sense of identity and self-worth.

We need approaches that provide:
• more opportunities that meet the full range of learning needs that disadvantaged
adults may have across the lifespan;
• better integration with wider social strategies to combat disadvantage; and
• more learning opportunities that support change and development in our most
deprived communities.

Currently, participation in lifelong learning by disadvantaged groups is low. Because
low-income groups are more likely than others to rely on public sector provision, the
way in which public sector lifelong learning is organised, what is offered, and how
it integrates with other public sector services can all have an impact on increasing
demand for learning. Currently, provision can be patchy, and funding regimes and
structures do not make it easy for needs to be either identifi ed or met. Providers
do not have the autonomy and fl exibility they need to respond to local needs
and demands, and there are insuffi cient mechanisms to support more integrated
approaches across public sector providers for assessing need and making consistent
provision for disadvantaged groups