A preliminary issue raised by several participants was the need to clearly define the terms ‘equality’ and ‘equity’. Comments suggested that both terms were used interchangeably. Clarification on how these and other terms are being used in the report. Several questions were raised at the beginning of the discussion. Click the links below to read participants' responses as summarized by the moderator. 1. Do you think that Global Inequalities are as interesting a topic as Within-Country Inequalities? Are you more interested in learning about the levels and trends of inequalities between countries or inequalities between certain groups within a country? 2. What do the following mean to you: "equity in health" and "equity in education"? 3. How would you describe inequalities in voice, recognition and social participation? Would you use any statistical indicators to describe and measure them, and if so, which ones? Would you try to describe such inequalities between nation states? 4. When you think about inequality, do you think about it in "absolute" or in "relative" terms? Using an example, imagine we have two individuals, A and B, earning $500 and $100 respectively. The next year the economy collapses and their earnings halve, so now A earns $250 and B $50 dollars. B is still earning one-fifth of A's salary. Has inequality decreased? Has it stayed constant?
Clarification: Equity, Ineqality, Equality
Equity is a complex philosophical concept. For the purposes of the World Development Report 2006, we take it to be a normative concept, related to the notions of fairness and social justice. More specifically, we regard a social allocation or process as equitable if it combines three elements in the proportions judged fair in that society. The three elements are:
(i) equality of opportunities for all members of society to pursue fulfilling lives of their own choosing.
(ii) processes that ensure a just rewards to merit;
(iii) avoidance of absolute deprivation in the space of outcomes. A fuller discussion of the trade-offs and complementarities among these components of equity will be contained in the report. We explicitly reject the notion that the report might aspire to prescribe what is equitable for each society, that being a prerogative of its members. Inequality is a positive* concept. It refers to a measure of the dispersion of a distribution (of income, or wealth, or years of schooling, or whatever). There are many possible ways to measure inequality in a given distribution, and different choices place different weights on different parts of a distribution. In a utilitarian framework, these weights can be interpreted as a normative foundation for the measure. Nevertheless, inequality is taken here as a descriptive concept, devoid of value judgment, whereas equity and inequity embody the social preferences and values of society with respect to the distribution, or to the processes that generated it. Equality, on the other hand, refers to full mathematical equality. There is equality in a distribution when everyone has the same value of the variable of interest. A distribution can not be more equal than another... It can only be less unequal. * Positive is used here as opposed to normative. It describes a situation, without value judgement. 1. Do you think that Global Inequalities are as interesting a topic as Within-Country Inequalities? Are you more interested in learning about the levels and trends of inequalities between countries or inequalities between certain groups within a country?
According to many e-participants, global inequalities and within-country inequalities are both of interest. Some have even mentioned that they are interrelated and this relationship is worthy of study. A common problem with regard to global inequalities is the deficiency of the available data. We have received valuable feedback on additional sources of information and global data sets from the University of Texas Inequality Project. Among the factors leading to increasing inequalities between countries that have been cited in this discussion are the uneven development and investment in science and technology, and the devastation caused by HIV/AIDS in southern Africa. Some participants felt that inequalities must be limited at the international level to reduce the risk of conflict and ensure global peace. Others have suggested that since there is no internationally recognized "government" capable of enforcing inequality-reduction systems between countries, the focus of this report should be on within-country inequalities (where fiscal and other policies can be used as tools).
2. What do the following mean to you: "equity in health" and "equity in education"?
In this discussion, "equity in health" has been related to access to the same level of basic treatment and care independent of variables such as economic background, geography, and cultural factors. Equal access to basic nutrition has also been referred to by one participant. This is linked to another comment proposing equity in health outcomes.
"Equity in education" has been defined as equal access to education to enable people to participate in social and political processes. It has also been linked to providing equal opportunities. According to one participant, such provision might require positive discrimination measures. A question raised is up to which level of instruction should equal access to education be provided. Note that education and preventive health information have been emphasized as means of achieving equity in health.
3. How would you describe inequalities in voice, recognition and social participation? Would you use any statistical indicators to describe and measure them, and if so, which ones? Would you try to describe such inequalities between nation states?
Many participants have stressed the importance of voice, recognition and social participation. Here are some of the indicators proposed: the time a citizen would be able to allocate to the participation process after meeting his livelihood requirements; the share of persons from disadvantaged communities in the civil service and in political units; the extent to which governments are accountable to citizens; the degree of decentralization and local control over decision making; the level of abstention in electoral processes; the number of NGOs registered in a country. The UNDP Human Development Report has been recommended as a reference with substantial indicators covering many areas of social activity.
At the global level, the number of votes in international organizations such as the UN, or the degree of media coverage about a country have also been proposed as possible indicators of inequalities in voice and participation between nation states.
4. When you think about inequality, do you think about it in "absolute" or in "relative" terms? Using an example, imagine we have two individuals, A and B, earning $500 and $100 respectively. The next year the economy collapses and their earnings halve, so now A earns $250 and B $50 dollars. B is still earning one-fifth of A's salary. Has inequality decreased? Has it stayed constant?
Let me first provide you with the academic answer to this question. If we think of inequality in relative terms, inequality has remained constant after the earnings of A and B have halved. However, if we think of inequality in absolute terms, inequality has clearly decreased. Therefore, it is crucial to be aware of these dimensions of inequality while understanding and interpreting facts.
The general view in this e-discussion has been that both dimensions of inequality are of interest. One participant felt that although inequality is a relative concept, it should be considered in absolute terms. Another pointed out that although relative inequality has remained constant in this example, "long-term inequality has increased as a function of time because individual B continues to be disadvantaged when compared to individual A". In fact, this comment introduces the idea that inequality is an even greater problem if there is no social mobility. Marta Menendez
|
RSS