The Sociology of Inequalities in Europe & Elsewhere

1. The Sociology of Inequalitiesin Europe & Elsewhere Göran Therborn University of Cambridge

2. Difference Non-identity No implication of commonality May or may not be changeable May or may not divide into better-worse, higher-lower Expresses some kind of unquestioned order Characteristically traditional or post-modern Inequality Non-idenitity Some implication of commonality Is changeable Divides into higher & lower Violates some norm of equality Inequality, a feature of modernity Inequality & DifferenceWhat is the difference?

3. 3 Kinds of Inequality, inter-related but each with its own dynamics • Vital inequality • Life-chances of human organisms, life & health expectancy • Existential inequality • Unequal allocation of recognition & respect to persons • Something more profound than ”status” or ”prestige”, more deeply affecting humans as persons • Resource inequality, of actors • A. Inequality of access to culture, education, employment, career, to social contacts, (inequality of opportunity) • B. Inequality of rewards, of income, wealth.

4. Of Inequality Distantiation Running ahead, falling behind Exclusion Hierarchization Exploitation Of Equality Approximation Catching up, affirmative action Inclusion De-hierachization Redistribution, Rehabilitation Mechanisms of Inequality& of Equality

5. Vital Inequality • Vital inequality of classes a modern phenomenon, first noticeable in l8th century Britain • Most persistent of class inequalities, more of it in l990s than in l910s • In Western Europe most class pronounced in Finland, France, and Britain • Can be locally dramatic: the gap in life expectancy between two areas of Glasgow in l990s is 28 years, the same as between Britain and sub-Saharian Africa • The national gap of life expectancy at birth in the EU is 22 years, 65.3 for Lithauanian males, 83.7 for Spanish females • Italians live longest healthy lives • National intra-gender gap in the EU, 13 yers for men (Swedes most longlived), 8 years for women (Romanians die first) • Gender inequality most pronounced in Eastern Europe, 13 years in Russia, 11 years in Eastern EU, 6 years in Western Europe • The genetic advantage of women in longevity is below world average in sub-Saharan Africa, in South Asia, and in the Arab countries, in that order.

6. Existential Inequality: Landmarks • Class/estate inequality before the law: Bourgeois revolution, ”1789” • Racism: rising in l9th - early 20th century, de-legitimzed by l945, institutionalized in USA until 1965-70, in South Africa until early l990s. • Non-institutional racism still frequent, Roma in Eastern Europe, Asians in Russia, dark immigrants in Italy & other Western Europe • Patriarchy/Sexism: prolonged legal process in Western Europe, from Sweden in l920 to France in l970, to Britain by l973, Italy in l975, Germany in l976, Greece, Netherlands, & Switzerland in l983-84 • After patriarchy: gender resource inequality.

7. Existential Inequality: Persistent Status Impact • The vital/mortal effect of bureaucratic status, the British Whitehall (central bureaucracy study of late 20th century) • Risk of dying at age 40-64, ratio of bottom to top echelons: 4:1 • A doctorate is good for your health • % dying at 66-70 in Sweden in the l990s: • Secondary education 11, tertiary 9, doctorate 6.

8. Market Income Egalitarian Europe Denmark 0.39 Sweden 0.39 Central Europe Austria 0.35 Belgium 0.43 Finland 0.38 France 0.36 Germany 0.43 Netherlands 0.41 Norway 0.40 Inegalitarian Europe Ireland 0.47 Italy 0.47 UK 0.46 Memorandum countries Japan 0.37 S. Korea 0.33 USA 0.47 Disposable Income Egalitarian Europe Denmark 0.23 Sweden 0.23 Central Europe Austria 0.27 Belgium 0.27 Finland 0.27 France 0.28 Germany 0.30 Nertherlands 0.27 Norway 0.28 Switzerland 0.28 Inegalitarian Europe Greece 0.32 Ireland 0.33 Italy 0.35 Poland 0.37 Portugal 0.39 Spain 0.32 UK 0.34 Income InequalityMid-2000s,Gini coefficients • Most inegalitarian Europe • Russia 0.43 • Ukraine ? .... • Memorandum countries • Japan 0.32 • S. Korea 0.31 • Mexico 0.47 • Turkey 0.43 • USA 0.38

9. Below EU Average (4.8) Slovenia 3.3 Sweden 3.4 Czech Rep. 3.5 Slovakia 3.5 Finland 3.7 Denmark 3.7 Norway 3.7 Hungary 3.7 Bulgaria 3.7 Austria 3.8 France 3.8 Malta 3.8 Belgium 3.9 Netherlands 4.0 Luxemburg 4.0 Cyprus 4.5 Above EU Average (4.8) Portugal 6.5 Latvia 6.3 Greece 6.0 Lithuania 5.9 Estonia 5.5 Italy 5.5 UK 5.5 Poland 5.3 Romania 5.3 Spain 5.3 Germany 5.0 Ireland 4.8 Income Inequality in 2007Quintile share ratios, ratio of the total disposable income share of the richest fifth to that of the poorest

10. Income Inequality Trends • Over the long run, national income distributions in the developed countries became more equal in the 20th century, with the two World Wars and the Depression of the l930s bringing major changes. • Post-World War II welfare state developments and full employment continued equalization, until about 1980. • Since l980 there is general tendency towards more inequality, but it is very uneven, and there are exceptions. ”Globalization” is no good explanation. • Market and disposable income after taxes and transfers, have variably correlated trajectories, closely following each other in France, Germany, Britain, and the US, but very divergent in Canada, Denmark and Japan, since the mid-90s in Italy. • While there is a main OECD tendency towards more inequality, most pronounced in the UK, in New Zealand,and the US, French inequality has gone down after l980, the Australian since late l990s, and the Greek since about 2000. Itay had a striking increase of inequality in the first haf of the l990s, which tapered off after that, in terms of disposable income, while continuing to rise on the market. • Usually, rising inequality has been driven by the top 1% distantiating themselves from the rest. But in Italy from the mid-80s to mid-90s and in USA in the l990s, the income of the bottom 20% actually declined in real terms.

11. Dynamics of Income InequalityI. Market Income • Market opportunities & exclusions • Unemployment rate • Sectoral productivity divides, e.g. small-scale argiculture vs. the rest of the economy • Class relations, e.g., unionization & collective barganing • Precarious & part-time employment • Employment opportunities for single mothers & for non-professional women with kids • Earnings dispersion • Degree of hierarchization • Gender & ethnic discrimination • Capital income • Size & distribution, usually falling in recessions.

12. Dynamics of Income InequalityII. Demography • Household composition Tending to increase inequality: • More single parents • More children, less female employment among the poor • More single households • Class endogamy, esp. Professionals & managers marrying professionals & managers • Larger proportion of elderly.

13. Dynamics of Income InequalityIII. Possibilities of Redistribution • Three policy lines: transfers, taxation, public services • Transfers, pensions, sick and unemployment payments etc., are most importanrt, 2:1 in relation to taxes • Together, transfers and taxes reduce about 40% of market income inequality in Denmark & Sweden, around 25% in Italy and Britain, 18% in the US, and 5% in South Korea • Public services of education, health etc., diminish inequality, but their distributive impact is difficult to calculate, and therefore controversial • The size of public services redistribution is probably similar to that of taxes, in most countries.

14. Conclusion • Inequality has three fundamental dimensions, four basic mechanisms, & several dynamic pathways. • Existential inequality was the main social target of modernity, but in more subtle forms, as social status, it has persisted, governing enduring vital inequality, of early death. • State policies, though operating in socio-economic-demographic contexts, have been crucial in the past, and maintain their capacity in the current wave of globalization. • European economic inequality has four major divisions, with Denmark & Sweden in the Premier League, Central Europe in the Second, a Third Europe of the South, the East,and the West (the British Isles), and, finally, Russia, and probably the Ukraine. • Europe, east of the British Isles, west of Poland, and north of the Alps, is the least unequal part of the world. • In comparison with Northeast Asia, with a relatively egalitarian distribution of market income, this European position is due to its welfare state and its correction for market inequality. • The main mechanism of recent inequality has been the distantiation of the top 1-10 per cent from the rest of population.