Track 6a. Global equity
(including transfer to the global South)
Track Chairs:
Stephen Morse. Centre for Environmental Strategy (CES), University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK.
Gerald Steiner. Department for Knowledge and Communication Management, Danube University Krems, Austria and former Schumpeter Fellow & Visiting Scholar at the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs (WCFIA), Harvard University, USA.
Contacts: s.morse@surrey.ac.uk; gsteiner@wcfia.harvard.edu
Goals and objectives of the track
“The Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] were a pledge to uphold the principles of human dignity, equality and equity, and free the world from extreme poverty.” (Ban Ki-moon in the forward to the Millennium Development Goals Report of 2014; page 3)
“It has to be accepted that there will inevitably be a continuation of economic inequalities between nations” (Lynn and Vanhanen, 2002; Page 195)
The two quotations above provide a contrasting picture of the achievability of equality across the globe. Ban Ki-moon refers to the MDGs as one means by which humanity could address issues of extreme poverty but also to uphold what he calls the “principles” of dignity, equality and equity. The mention here of the MDGs is apposite given that they are about to be replaced (early 2016) with a new set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are built on the same set of principles. The second quotation is entirely different and comes from a picture of the world that is bleak indeed. These authors, in various publications, have looked at the causes of economic inequality across the globe and come to a conclusion that the causes are genetic and immutable. It is a picture of the world founded on old ideas of genetic (racial) superiority; that some ‘races’ have genes that make them ‘better’ at economic performance than others and this becomes apparent when economic indicators are related to measures such as IQ. They pass no judgement per se in their publications as to whether equality in economic performance is desirable in any ‘principled’ sense just that it is not achievable for biological reasons. While the Lynn and Vanhanen quote is founded on a genetically-based argument not shared by many others, the notion that equality is necessarily desirable has also been questioned by many on the political right.
While the two quotations provide some very stark contrasts they also raise many questions. For example:
- What is the difference between equality and equity? Ban Ki-moon speaks of them both in his forward to the MDG report of 2014 and the terms are often used interchangeably but while related they are quite different. Equality is when people are treated the same while equity is when people are treated fairly once any circumstances have been taken into account. But what are these circumstances and how should they be addressed when trying to achieve equity?
- Equality/equity of what? The Lynn and Vanhanen quote refers specifically to economic inequalities but there are many other facets of human life that could be considered.
- Why do we need equity? There is a principled case here, of course, based on ideas within social justice but there are also instrumental arguments. For example, some have argued that any move towards greater equity brings economic gains.
- How can equity be best achieved? Lynn and Vanhanen argue that it is not possible in practice but on a far more positive note the MDGs were seen by Ban Ki-moon as one means of helping with this and the SDGs follow in similar vein but, of course, there are many other potential approaches and vehicles.
- How is global equity/equality related to regional and local forms of equity/equality? (e.g. from a systems science perspective)
- Can inequalities/inequities be considered as potential innovation fields and as a source for sustainable innovation? (particularly form a multilevel innovation systems perspective)
- How can equity best be measured so progress towards achieving it can be gauged? There are measures such as the Gini Coefficient but these tend to be data hungry. Are there other approaches that can be taken? How is equity related to other macro measures such as the Human Development Index (HDI) or OECD’s Better Life Index?
- How is global equity/equality related to the wellbeing and health of/and within a society and its members?
- With respect to equity/quality in respect to convergence/divergence of society, what role will elites (e.g., power, knowledge, networks) play?
- How can collaborative approaches such as transdisciplinarity (i.e. science with society), triple helix, citizen-driven innovation etc. play as part of an international negotiation process?
Following on from the questions we raise above we would especially like to invite contributions that address them within a global sustainable development context. Of especial interest is question 4 in the above list – how equity can be best achieved? Papers that present new approaches and insights regarding the practical challenges would be most welcome from various disciplines beyond sustainability science (e.g., social/political and economic sciences, management studies, public health, anthropology, sustainability science).
References
Lynn, R. and Vanhanen, T., 2002. IQ and the wealth of nations. Praeger, Westport CT.
UNDP, 2014. Millennium development Goals Report 2014. United Nations, New York.
You may submit your abstract by visiting the Ex Ordo abstract submission system (you will be required to setup an account first): http://isdrs2016.exordo.com/
