Event Begins: Thursday, November 14, 2024 12:30pm
Location: LSA Building
Organized By: Department of Sociology

Fall 2024 Semester Line-Up:

9/19: Lanora Johnson, "Car Accidents & Disability in Rural Kentucky"

10/3: Spencer Allen, "Disparities and Implications of Survey Measurement Error: NSF GRFP Proposal"

10/10: Jane Furey, "The Consequences of Racialized Education Careers"

10/31: Janet Wang, "Overqualification across the life course"

11/14: Davis Daumler, "Changing Marriage Patterns and the Shifting Foundation of Wealth"

11/21: Junchao Tang, "A Mirrored Equalizer? An Assessment of Boarding Institution and STS-based Achievement Gap"

1. Climate inequality must take centre stage at COP29  The Conversation
2. Oil and gas are ‘a gift of God’: COP29 leader  The Australian Financial Review
3. COP29 delegates complain about being sidelined in decision making  ABC News
4. This year has been masterclass in human destruction, UN chief tells Cop29  The Guardian

The high-end store has apologised for not hosting Paralympic athletes alongside Team GB Olympians.

Aim/Purpose: The aim of this paper is to identify the possibilities for reducing the second and third levels of the digital divide (or inequality) through conscious application of digital technologies, especially through the promotion of digital means for information, enlightenment, and entertainment. Background: This article reviews studies carried out between 2000 and 2017, which investigate the social benefits of digital technology use for disadvantaged user groups and, especially, of their outcomes in terms of increasing digital skills and motivation to use information and communication technologies. Methodology: The literature review of the selected texts was carried out using thematic content analysis. The coding scheme was open but based on the theory of three levels of digital divide by van Dijk. Contribution: The results of the analysis show the difficulties related to the attempts of reducing the digital divide on the second and third level using only digital interventions, but also reveal the potential of these interventions. Findings: The literature review confirms the connection of different levels of digital divide with other relational and structural inequalities. It provides insights into the strengths and weaknesses of digital interventions aimed at the reduction of digital inequalities. Their success depends on the consideration of the context and participants needs as well as on carefully planned strategies. The paper summarizes and demonstrates the shortcomings and limitations of poorly designed interventions in reducing the digital divide but emphasizes the possibilities of raising the motivation and benefits for the participants of strategically planned and implemented projects. Recommendations for Practitioners: While planning a digital intervention with the aim of reducing digital inequalities, it is necessary to assess carefully the context and the needs of participants. Educational interventions should be based on suitable didactic and learning strategies. Recommendation for Researchers: More research is needed into the factors that increase the effectiveness of digital interventions aimed at reducing the digital divide. Future Research: We will apply the findings of this literature review in an intervention in the context of Lithuanian towns of different sizes.

Hierarchy is a reality of group life, for humans as well as for most other group-living species. And yet, there remains considerable debate about whether and when hierarchy can promote group performance and member satisfaction. We suggest that progress in this debate has been hampered by a lack of clarity about hierarchy and how to conceptualize it. Whereas prevailing conceptualizations of hierarchy in the group and organization literature focus on inequality in member power or status (i.e., centralization or steepness), we build on the ethological and social network traditions to advance a view of hierarchy as cascading relations of dyadic influence (i.e., acyclicity). We further suggest that hierarchy thus conceptualized is more likely to capture the functional benefits of hierarchy whereas hierarchy as inequality is more likely to be dysfunctional. In a study of 75 teams drawn from a wide range of industries, we show that whereas acyclicity in influence relations reduces conflict and thereby enhances both group performance and member satisfaction, centralization and steepness have negative effects on conflict, performance, and satisfaction, particularly in groups that perform complex tasks. The theory and results of this study can help to clarify and advance research on the functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy in task groups.

The burgeoning economic inequality between the richest and the poorest is a cause of concern for social, political, and ethical reasons. While businesses are both implicated and affected by growing inequality, business schools have largely neglected to subject the phenomenon to sufficient critique. This is, in part, because far too many management educators rely on orthodox economic perspectives—often represented by neoliberal capitalism—which have dominated the curricula and the teaching philosophy of business schools. To address this issue, this article underscores the need for business schools to critically examine the relationship between neoliberal capitalism and economic inequalities, and to overtly engage with this nexus in pedagogical practice. The article concludes by revisiting the concepts of relationality and answerability as paths by which to address the current predicament. Relationality and answerability collectively offer: i) conceptual and reflexive tools by which to re-imagine business school education, and, ii) space for business schools to debate important questions about the taken-for-granted, but problematic, assumptions underlying the ideology of neoliberal capitalism

Globally, only 7% of women have financial services as per the World Bank Global Index Report 2017

Children's Geographies; 06/01/2022
(AN 156867994); ISSN: 14733285
Academic Search Premier

Children's Geographies; 08/01/2022
(AN 158427718); ISSN: 14733285
Academic Search Premier

Volume 32, Issue 7, December 2023. Read the full article ›

The post The Patriarchs: The origins of inequality was curated by information for practice.

The post The most unequal region in the world: combatting inequality in Latin America | was curated by information for practice.

The post Drivers of Income Inequality in Ireland and Northern Ireland was curated by information for practice.

The post Explaining socioeconomic inequality in food consumption patterns among households with women of childbearing age in South Africa was curated by information for practice.

Assessing racial equity globally is complex, involving policies, cultural attitudes and systemic issues that impact minority communities differently across regions.

To reduce racial disparities in the U.S. criminal justice system, policymakers at all levels should explore ways to decrease police stops and searches, jail detention, prison admission, and long sentences through coordinated policy reforms.

Stefanie Stantcheva, economist at Harvard University, founded the Social Economics Lab to study inequality, our feelings about it, and how policies influence it. She says when we estimate how much money our colleagues make or how much taxes impact us, we are often very far off from the truth. Her research also shows that our misconceptions are often linked to political beliefs. She argues that we need to be more aware of the realities of inequality if we want to create better economic opportunities.

Despite the investments made in the last few years, many companies are falling short of their diversity, equity, and inclusion aims. Some firms have faced difficulty spreading their DEI efforts top-down throughout the organization. Trier Bryant, the cofounder and CEO of Just Work, details why and shares a framework that teams and individuals can use to fight bias on the day-to-day level at work.

Editor's note: This is an excerpt of Planet Money 's newsletter. You can sign up here . In summer of 1967, African Americans protested, marched, and rioted in cities across the country. The unrest convinced President Lyndon Johnson to set up the Kerner Commission, which spent about six months doing research, visiting slums, and holding hearings. In 1968, they published a provocative report that civil rights leader Jesse Jackson recently called "the last attempt to address honestly and seriously the structural inequalities that plague African Americans." "Segregation and poverty have created in the racial ghetto a destructive environment totally unknown to most white Americans," the Kerner report said. "What white Americans have never fully understood — but what the Negro can never forget — is that white society is deeply implicated in the ghetto. White institutions created it, white institutions maintain it, and white society condones it." Fifty years later, Americans are taking to the

The Political Economy of Inequality, Democracy & Oligarchy, on Friday, November 13, 2020 at 5:00 pm eastern time.

This panel discussion will focus upon the erosion of democratic institutions and the rise of oligarchy that has followed in the wake of unprecedented economic inequality. The panel will address elite efforts to entrench themselves politically as well as economically, including the consequences of such efforts in terms of human development. The panel will focus upon the specific context of election 2020 and the uncertainty it is creating. The subversion of democracy and the law governing our democracy naturally holds many costs, and each panelist will address such costs. Each panelist will also seek to articulate some mechanism for a path forward.  Register here

PANELISTS:

Emma Coleman Jordan, Georgetown Law Center

andré douglas pond cummings, Univ. of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law

Atiba Ellis, Marquette University Law School

Steven Ramirez, Loyola University of Chicago School of Law

Gerald Torres, Yale Law School

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the nature of work as we know it. Between flexible work arrangements, part-time contracts, and side gigs, it’s been difficult to gauge just how many people are working from home as a result. But according to Stanford’s research, 42% of the U.S. labor force was working from home full time […]

The post How employers can address increased gender inequality due to Working From Home appeared first on DiversityJobs.com.

Lutz Mattner
Theor. Probability and Math. Statist. 111 (), 45-122.
Abstract, references and article information

Chris A.J. Klaassen
Theor. Probability and Math. Statist. 111 (), 9-19.
Abstract, references and article information

COVID-19 in South Africa: Leadership, Resilience and Inequality Expert comment sysadmin 7 May 2020

In a world looking for leadership, South Africa’s president Cyril Ramaphosa has been remarkable. One year after he carried the time-worn ANC through a national election, South Africans are crying out for more.

In the COVID-19 crisis so far, Cyril Ramaphosa has been widely praised for displaying the decisive leadership so many hoped for when they cast their ballot for him in May 2019. Buttressed by others such as health minister Dr Zweli Mkhize, and on a simple objective to prevent transmission, South Africa has been a lesson to the world. Act fast. Act hard.

Former president Thabo Mbeki’s disastrous response to the HIV crisis cast a long shadow over his legacy, and Ramaphosa has taken note. South Africa has had one of the tightest lockdowns in the world. No exercise. No cigarettes. No alcohol.

The lockdown was imposed when the country had only around 1,000 recorded cases and just two deaths. As a result, transmission from returning travellers has not yet led to an exponential infection rate within the community. The government’s swift reaction has bought much needed time with the peak now seemingly delayed to September or October.

Continental and national leadership

Ramaphosa has also emerged as a key focal point for Africa-wide responses. As current chair of the African Union (AU) he leads the continental engagement with the World Health Organization (WHO), and the various international finance institutions, while South African officials are working with the AU and the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) on a push for African debt restructuring.

He has also been active in trouble shooting to unlock external assistance to the continent, including from China and Russia. Appointing special envoys is typical of his boardroom-honed leadership style.

International and regional partnerships are vital for resilience and the arrival of 217 Cuban doctors to South Africa is strongly reminiscent of the liberationist solidarity of the Cold War era. And regional economies remain dependent on South Africa to protect their own vulnerable citizens. Following the 2008 financial crisis, it was South Africa’s regional trading relationships that remained robust, while trade with its main global partners in China and the US dropped.

Despite the plaudits, Ramaphosa remains vulnerable to challenge at home, notably around his failure to stimulate South Africa’s moribund economy. On the eve of lockdown, Moody’s joined its peers Standard and Poor’s and Fitch in giving South Africa a below investment grade credit rating. The move was a long time coming. Long mooted economic reforms were slow to materialise, and South Africa had fallen into recession.

Ramaphosa depends on a small core of close advisors and allies, initially united in apparent opposition to the kleptocratic rule of President Jacob Zuma and the deep patronage networks he created within both the party and the state. But this allegiance is being tested by economic reality. Support within the party was already drifting prior to the crisis.

Disagreements are not just technocratic – there are big ideological questions in play around the role of the state in the economy, the level of intervention, and its affordability, with key government figures sceptical of rapid market reforms. Energy minister and former union stalwart Gwede Mantashe is wary of job losses, and minister of public enterprises Pravin Gordhan protective of state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Before coronavirus hit, Ramaphosa seemed content to allow these policy disputes to play themselves out with little decisive intervention.

Slow progress on reform, against worsening economic performance, left Ramaphosa and his allies exposed. In January the president missed the UK’s African Investment Summit in order to assert control over a party meeting at which it was expected his detractors would seek to remove Gordhan.

COVID-19 has sharpened thinking

As the independently assertive - and eminently quotable - pro-market reformist finance minister Tito Mboweni stated, ‘you can’t eat ideology’. Accelerated reform and restructuring is required if the government turns to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for assistance.

For the first time, Gordhan has been forced to deny a bailout to beleaguered state airline South African Airways (SAA), and the government’s lockdown bailout of R500 billion has been applauded by business. Much like the fiscal stimulus and recovery plan of 2018, it relies on smart spending, targeting sectors with high multiplier effects. It also includes significant reserve bank loans.

But it has been criticised for not doing enough to help the most vulnerable. There is considerable fear of what could happen when the virus takes hold in South Africa’s townships and informal settlements where social distancing is almost impossible, basic toilet facilities are shared, and HIV and TB rates high.

There are mounting concerns of the humanitarian cost of a prolonged lockdown, and the government has been faster than others in implementing a tiered lockdown system, trying to get people back to work and keep the economy afloat.

South Africa has been criticized by the UN for the use of lethal force by security forces in enforcing lockdown and, in a society plagued by corruption, there are fears legislation to stop the spread of false information could be used to restrict legitimate reporting on the virus response or other issues.

COVID-19 shines a spotlight on societies’ fault-lines worldwide. South Africa is often touted as having one of the highest levels of inequality in the world but, in a globalized economy, these divisions are international as much as they are local.

Resilience comes from within, but also depends on regional and global trading and financial systems. South Africans and international partners have long recognised Ramaphosa’s leadership qualities as an impressive voice for the global south.

But he must also be an advocate for South Africa’s poor. This crisis could accelerate implementation of his landmark pro-poor National Health Insurance and Universal Health Care programmes. Or the hit of COVID-19 on top of South Africa’s existing economic woes could see them derailed entirely. Ramaphosa must push through economic reforms at the same time as managing COVID-19 and rebuilding trust in his government.

Eliminating gifted programs all together is the wrong solution to fixing racial and economic imbalances, argues James R. Delisle.

New research shows that teacher mindsets matter when it comes to racial inequities. Here's how to build a classroom culture that makes a difference.

This is the 16th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

Steven Pinker, in his book Enlightenment Now, relates an old Russian joke about two peasants named Boris and Igor. They are both poor. Boris has a goat. Igor does not. One day, Igor is granted a wish by a visiting fairy. What will he wish for?

“I wish,” he says, “that Boris’s goat should die.”

The joke ends there, revealing as much about human nature as about economics. Consider the three things that happen if the fairy grants the wish. One, Boris becomes poorer. Two, Igor stays poor. Three, inequality reduces. Is any of them a good outcome?

I feel exasperated when I hear intellectuals and columnists talking about economic inequality. It is my contention that India’s problem is poverty – and that poverty and inequality are two very different things that often do not coincide.

To illustrate this, I sometimes ask this question: In which of the following countries would you rather be poor: USA or Bangladesh? The obvious answer is USA, where the poor are much better off than the poor of Bangladesh. And yet, while Bangladesh has greater poverty, the USA has higher inequality.

Indeed, take a look at the countries of the world measured by the Gini Index, which is that standard metric used to measure inequality, and you will find that USA, Hong Kong, Singapore and the United Kingdom all have greater inequality than Bangladesh, Liberia, Pakistan and Sierra Leone, which are much poorer. And yet, while the poor of Bangladesh would love to migrate to unequal USA, I don’t hear of too many people wishing to go in the opposite direction.

Indeed, people vote with their feet when it comes to choosing between poverty and inequality. All of human history is a story of migration from rural areas to cities – which have greater inequality.

If poverty and inequality are so different, why do people conflate the two? A key reason is that we tend to think of the world in zero-sum ways. For someone to win, someone else must lose. If the rich get richer, the poor must be getting poorer, and the presence of poverty must be proof of inequality.

But that’s not how the world works. The pie is not fixed. Economic growth is a positive-sum game and leads to an expansion of the pie, and everybody benefits. In absolute terms, the rich get richer, and so do the poor, often enough to come out of poverty. And so, in any growing economy, as poverty reduces, inequality tends to increase. (This is counter-intuitive, I know, so used are we to zero-sum thinking.) This is exactly what has happened in India since we liberalised parts of our economy in 1991.

Most people who complain about inequality in India are using the wrong word, and are really worried about poverty. Put a millionaire in a room with a billionaire, and no one will complain about the inequality in that room. But put a starving beggar in there, and the situation is morally objectionable. It is the poverty that makes it a problem, not the inequality.

You might think that this is just semantics, but words matter. Poverty and inequality are different phenomena with opposite solutions. You can solve for inequality by making everyone equally poor. Or you could solve for it by redistributing from the rich to the poor, as if the pie was fixed. The problem with this, as any economist will tell you, is that there is a trade-off between redistribution and growth. All redistribution comes at the cost of growing the pie – and only growth can solve the problem of poverty in a country like ours.

It has been estimated that in India, for every one percent rise in GDP, two million people come out of poverty. That is a stunning statistic. When millions of Indians don’t have enough money to eat properly or sleep with a roof over their heads, it is our moral imperative to help them rise out of poverty. The policies that will make this possible – allowing free markets, incentivising investment and job creation, removing state oppression – are likely to lead to greater inequality. So what? It is more urgent to make sure that every Indian has enough to fulfil his basic needs – what the philosopher Harry Frankfurt, in his fine book On Inequality, called the Doctrine of Sufficiency.

The elite in their airconditioned drawing rooms, and those who live in rich countries, can follow the fashions of the West and talk compassionately about inequality. India does not have that luxury.

The India Uncut Blog © 2010 Amit Varma. All rights reserved.
Follow me on Twitter.

Despite earlier income convergence among nations, many low-income countries (LICs) and people are falling further behind. Worse, the number of poor and hungry has been increasing again after declining for decades. After the post-Second World War ‘Golden Age’ ended over half a century ago, the world has seen unequal and uneven economic growth, industrialisation, and […]

The struggle for women’s right to decide in Latin America and the Caribbean, for their access to legal, safe and free abortion continues in the region, with some countries fully criminalising it, others with severe regulations, and a few guaranteeing better conditions, while threats of regression persist. This Saturday 28 September marks, as every year, […]

In this episode of The FemTech series Olivia Friett is joined by Jane Kennedy and Dr. MaryAnn Ferreux where we will discuss the inequality in women's health and how we can overcome the obstacles that come with this.

Bristol : Bristol University Press, [2023]

Manchester : Manchester University Press, [2023]

Princeton, New Jersey : Princeton University Press, [2019]

The big lesson from the Summit is that developing countries have yet to exploit the opportunities presented by the U.N. system

National Bureau of Economic Research

National Bureau of Economic Research

National Bureau of Economic Research

National Bureau of Economic Research

National Bureau of Economic Research