Inequality the view from sociology

1
Inequalitythe view from sociology

• TRAN THU QUYNH
• Summer School on Inequality
• Civita Castellana, ITALYA
• 2007

2
The view from economics

• Economic analysis bases essentially on rational
  choice model.
• Hypothesis
• Man are rational in the sense that man prefer to
  be rich than to be poor that the poors want to
  become rich and the riches want to maintain their
  wealth.
• This preference is fix and given in despite of
  individual circumstances or institutional and
  cultural context
• Theres conflict in the distribution of all
  assets, such as land, wealth, power, education
  And both the riches and the poors participate in
  this conflict.

3
The view from economics

• First phase conceptual construction (inequality
  measurement) 1970-1980s (Atkinson (1970),
  Mirrlees (1971), Sen (1973), Sen (1976)
• Second phase conceptual consolidation and
  application 1980s - 90s (Kanbur (1987), Alderman
  (1995), Basu (1997)
• Third phase conceptual reconstruction 00s
  (World Bank (1999), Kanbur (2001) highly
  influenced by fundamentally sociological
  concerns.

4
Simple example of man irrationality Game show
 Maillon faible 

• Who do you want to eliminate? (Tacit message
  Which people group do you want to eliminate?)
• US Hispanics and old
• France black and old
• Irrational choice, disproportionately to
  participants performance
• (Freaknomics, 2005)

5
Difference in attitude towards inequality

• Verba and Orren (1985)
• Atkinson, Bourguinon and Morrison (1992)
• Piketty (1995)
• Benabou and Ok (2000)
• Alesina and La Ferrara (2000)
• Corneo (2000)
• Ravaillon and Lokshin (2000)
• Alesina and Di Tella (2001)

6
Difference in attitude towards inequality between
Americans and Europeans
7
Major conclusions

• Europeans are more averse towards economic
  inequality than Americans but Americans are
  interest more in political equity than Europeans
• Leftist Europeans are more averse to inequality
  than rightist Europeans
• Rich et rightist Europeans are indifferent to
  inequality but rich Americans are adverse to
  inequality
• Poor Americans are indifferent to inequality but
  poor Europeans are averse to inequality
• European governments are more under pressure to
  redistribute than American government

8
The view from sociology

• Criticize Income approaches  of Economists and
  propose the need of a  multi-dimensional 
  approach
• Economics can just  catch  inequality picture
  in a given context but can not explain historical
  causes or predict future trend of this inequality
  phenomenon
• It exists psycho-religious-cultural forces that
   structure  Inequality
• Hypothesis
• Historical arrangements/latent boundaries
  formalize the unequal character of each given
  society
• Both riches and poors have to observe theses
   boundaries 

9
The view from classical sociology
10
The view from sociology

• First phase class models (classical sociology)
• Second phase the rise of Culturalism 1980s -
  (Bourdieu (1984), Wilson (1987)
• Third phase rediscussion of class models 00s
  (rapprochement between sociologists and
  economists (Kanbur and Grusky (2006)

11
Modern sociology

• Hicks (2000)
• Clarck and Lipset (2001)
• Marger (2002)
• Béteille (2003)
• Weeden and Grusky (2004)
• Reis and Moore (2005)
• Wilson (2005)

12
Majors conclusions

• To understand inequality phenomenon (its causes,
  mechanisms, trends), it needs to take into
  account political, cultural, religious,
  philosophic factors which constitute  socially
  common values , social expectations of this
  concerned society
• There are statistical predictabilities about
  religious and cultural driven behavior.
• Cultural traditions of thought influence how the
  self perceive itself.
• All behavior has irreducible psychological as
  well as social determinants and reflects what is
  subjective, with emotionally driven logic, as
  well as what is objectively rational and
  expediential in human thought

13
Major conclusions

• Social structure is hierarchicalized
  systematically in all aspects political, status,
  remunerations, prerogatives... This structure can
  not be changed radically over short term.
• Belonging in one social  ladder  in this
  hierarchy influence individuals comportment,
  attitude and achievements, independently of its
  real capacities.
• These socio-cultural inequality reign over
  economic inequality in the sense that the former
  create and explain the latter.

14
Major conclusions

• In all societies, it exist mechanisms (ideology,
  social norms, social values, customs, education,
  institutions) that function to support and
  maintain their hierarchical order
• Inequality is, to some extent, the historic
  result of population choice

15
Confucianist Asia and inequality

• HUNTINGTON S., 1984
• European Protestantism advocates for compromise
  and equity
• Islamism et Confucianism are more hierarchical,
  rigid and indifferent vis-à-vis this occidental
  tradition
• Power hierarchisation is an inherent nature of
  East Asia culture and impossible to change.

16
Inequality as cultural construction
17
Inequality as cultural construction
18
Inequality as cultural construction