Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society
Based on up-to-date data, this paper wants to show how different patterns of social and economic inequality develop in modern society. Referring to the research by Sylvia Walby, Tim Butler and Paul Watt, Quan Li and Rafael Reuveny, Blossfeld et al., Pablo Beramendi and Christopher J. Anderson, Peter...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Економічний вісник Донбасу |
|---|---|
| Datum: | 2013 |
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України
2013
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online Zugang: | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/123370 |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Назва журналу: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Zitieren: | Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society / L.V. Rudenko, P.O. Steshenko // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2013. — № 4 (34). — С. 11–14. — Бібліогр.: 7 назв. — англ. |
Institution
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| id |
nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-123370 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
Rudenko, L.V. Steshenko, P.O. 2017-09-03T18:56:27Z 2017-09-03T18:56:27Z 2013 Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society / L.V. Rudenko, P.O. Steshenko // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2013. — № 4 (34). — С. 11–14. — Бібліогр.: 7 назв. — англ. 1817-3772 https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/123370 316.34-047.48 Based on up-to-date data, this paper wants to show how different patterns of social and economic inequality develop in modern society. Referring to the research by Sylvia Walby, Tim Butler and Paul Watt, Quan Li and Rafael Reuveny, Blossfeld et al., Pablo Beramendi and Christopher J. Anderson, Peter Hoeller, this paper considers inequality as a massive and extending phenomenon as well as describes more precisely income inequality measurement and aspects. Finally it determines the directions of society's improvement and describes a progress in this field of studying. Базуючись на актуальних даних, ця стаття показує, як розвиваються складові соціально-економічної нерівності у сучасному суспільстві. Посилаючись на дослідження Сильвії Валбі, Тіма Батлера, Пола Ватта, Куана Лі, Рафаеля Рувені, Блоссфкльда, Пабло Бераменді, Крістофера Андерсена, Пітера Холлера та ін., ця робота розглядає нерівність як масовий феномен та феномен, що поширюється, а також більш конкретно висвітлює засоби його вимірювання та аспекти. В результаті знайдено шляхи удосконалення суспільства, в цілому, а також прогрес у сфері дослідження поданої проблеми. Основываясь на актуальных данных, данная статья показывает, как развиваются составляющие социальнокономического неравенства в современном обществе. Ссылаясь на исследования Сильвии Валби, Тима Батлера, Пола Ватта, Куана Ли, Рафаэля Рувени, Блоссфельда, Пабло Бераменди, Кристофера Андерсена, Питера Холлера и др., данная работа рассматривает неравенство как массовый и распространяющийся феномен, а также более конкретно освещает средства его измерения и аспекты. В заключение выявляются пути совершенствования общества в целом, а также прогресс в области исследования данной проблемы. en Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України Економічний вісник Донбасу Economic Theory Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society Соціальноекономічна нерівність у сучасному суспільстві Социально-экономическое неравенство в современном обществе Article published earlier |
| institution |
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| collection |
DSpace DC |
| title |
Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society |
| spellingShingle |
Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society Rudenko, L.V. Steshenko, P.O. Economic Theory |
| title_short |
Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society |
| title_full |
Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society |
| title_fullStr |
Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society |
| title_sort |
socio-economic inequality in modern society |
| author |
Rudenko, L.V. Steshenko, P.O. |
| author_facet |
Rudenko, L.V. Steshenko, P.O. |
| topic |
Economic Theory |
| topic_facet |
Economic Theory |
| publishDate |
2013 |
| language |
English |
| container_title |
Економічний вісник Донбасу |
| publisher |
Інститут економіки промисловості НАН України |
| format |
Article |
| title_alt |
Соціальноекономічна нерівність у сучасному суспільстві Социально-экономическое неравенство в современном обществе |
| description |
Based on up-to-date data, this paper wants to show how different patterns of social and economic inequality develop in modern society. Referring to the research by Sylvia Walby, Tim Butler and Paul Watt, Quan Li and Rafael Reuveny, Blossfeld et al., Pablo Beramendi and Christopher J. Anderson, Peter Hoeller, this paper considers inequality as a massive and extending phenomenon as well as describes more precisely income inequality measurement and aspects. Finally it determines the directions of society's improvement and describes a progress in this field of studying.
Базуючись на актуальних даних, ця стаття показує, як розвиваються складові соціально-економічної нерівності у сучасному суспільстві. Посилаючись на дослідження Сильвії Валбі, Тіма Батлера, Пола Ватта, Куана Лі, Рафаеля Рувені, Блоссфкльда, Пабло Бераменді, Крістофера Андерсена, Пітера Холлера та ін., ця робота розглядає нерівність як масовий феномен та феномен, що поширюється, а також більш конкретно висвітлює засоби його вимірювання та аспекти. В результаті знайдено шляхи удосконалення суспільства, в цілому, а також прогрес у сфері дослідження поданої проблеми.
Основываясь на актуальных данных, данная статья показывает, как развиваются составляющие социальнокономического неравенства в современном обществе. Ссылаясь на исследования Сильвии Валби, Тима Батлера, Пола Ватта, Куана Ли, Рафаэля Рувени, Блоссфельда, Пабло Бераменди, Кристофера Андерсена, Питера Холлера и др., данная работа рассматривает неравенство как массовый и распространяющийся феномен, а также более конкретно освещает средства его измерения и аспекты. В заключение выявляются пути совершенствования общества в целом, а также прогресс в области исследования данной проблемы.
|
| issn |
1817-3772 |
| url |
https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/123370 |
| citation_txt |
Socio-economic Inequality in Modern Society / L.V. Rudenko, P.O. Steshenko // Економічний вісник Донбасу. — 2013. — № 4 (34). — С. 11–14. — Бібліогр.: 7 назв. — англ. |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT rudenkolv socioeconomicinequalityinmodernsociety AT steshenkopo socioeconomicinequalityinmodernsociety AT rudenkolv socíalʹnoekonomíčnanerívnístʹusučasnomususpílʹství AT steshenkopo socíalʹnoekonomíčnanerívnístʹusučasnomususpílʹství AT rudenkolv socialʹnoékonomičeskoeneravenstvovsovremennomobŝestve AT steshenkopo socialʹnoékonomičeskoeneravenstvovsovremennomobŝestve |
| first_indexed |
2025-11-25T22:54:35Z |
| last_indexed |
2025-11-25T22:54:35Z |
| _version_ |
1850575788374491136 |
| fulltext |
11
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
Introduction
The statement that socio-economic inequality has a
massive character and in many parts of the world is getting
wider is to be found in modern books devoted to this
problem. For example, income inequality in the United
States, the richest society on earth, has widened in every
year since the 1980s. By 2000, nearly 3 per cent of
American households were living on less than $5,000 a
year while over 13 percent had incomes of $100,000 and
over. This statistical evidence indicates the scale of
inequality, but it does not allow us to understand its social
nature and impact [1]. Blossfeld et al. (2011) explains an
aspect which was unclear: how the patterns of social
inequality in modern societies are changing through
globalization. Therefore, his research compares the
consequences of globalization for the development of social
inequalities in Europe by analyzing nine European countries
from five welfare and labour market regimes [2].
Walby assumes that equality matters not only because
it is a major contemporary framework of justice and
progress, but also because inequalities affect the different
forms and speed of economic and human development.
For instance, class is an evident inequality, but not the
only significant one. Inequalities are also associated with
gender, ethnicity, race, nation, religion, able-bodiedness,
sexual orientation, age, generation, linguistic community
and more. These inequalities affect the differences between
forms of modernity as well as the key dynamics of social
change [3]. “Economic inequality is particularly significant
for people’s capacity to have access to and command of
resources. Inequality has an impact right across society”
[4]. Beramendi and Anderson show how democracy helps
to shape levels of income inequality in society [5]. Li and
Reuveny also raise a question about how democracy
influences distribution of income [6]. The OECD also
devoted recent articles to the income inequality problems.
In many OECD countries, income inequality has increased
over the past decades. In some countries, top incomes
have captured a large share of the overall income gains,
while income for others has risen little. At the same time,
poverty remains a pressing policy issue, not only because
of the negative effects of the recent economic crises [7].
Multiple Complex Inequalities
It is widely known that inequality refers to disparities
between individuals, groups and nations in access to
resources, opportunities, assets and income. Ridge /
Wright (2008) as well as other researchers write that
inequality has a high impact right across society. It can
be seen in people’s life chances, their health and life
expectancy and their education and employment
opportunities [4]. Unequal social relations involve
difference as well as inequality. Some aspects of the
different activities may be positively valued, while others
will be considered as unjust. A concept of ‘complex
inequalities’ combines inequality and difference [3].
Class has traditionally been seen as the main form
of social inequality [3]. But now some sociologists have
claimed that the study of class is no longer relevant to
understanding contemporary society at all, if it ever was
[1]. Walby (2009) considers gender and ethnicity
important forms of inequality, as can be the case with
disability, faith, age, and sexual orientation (it is illegal to
discriminate on grounds of gender, ethnicity, disability,
faith, age, and sexual orientation in the EU: see the
European Commission 2007a [3]. She also shows a new
form of inequalities, such as global warming, which has
had stronger effects on the poor South rather than the
rich North of the world and on future generations.
Class can be a complex inequality and is often seen
as inequality in which the defining feature is economic
exploitation, a presumption of a common standard of
access to income and wealth against which to measure
inequality. Class regime is to be found not only in the
economy, but also in the polity, violence and civil society
[3]. In Britain, for example, the official Registrar General’s
(RG) social class scheme has historically been used as a
part of employment aggregate approach (Reid, 1998) [1].
This scheme (Table 1) groups a large number of
occupations into a smaller number of hierarchically
organized classes. Occupationally based class schemes
can be correlated with a large number of other variables,
such as rates of illness or the proportion of young people
going to university, and this allows the measurement of
statistical correlations between occupational class and
differences in health, education, income, etc. [1].
“Research on health inequalities has shown that
mortality rates follow a ‘class gradient’; in other words
that the percentages of the population dying and being ill
are highest among social class V (unskilled occupations)
and they decrease as one moves ‘up’ the class scheme
to their lowest level in class I (professionals)” [1]. This
scheme was replaced from 2001 by an alternative more
UDC 316.34-047.48
L. V. Rudenko,
PhD (Economics)
P. O. Steshenko,
Donetsk National Technical University
SOCIO-ECONOMIC INEQUALITY IN MODERN SOCIETY
L. V. Rudenko, P. O. Steshenko
12
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
complex scheme, the National Statistics Socio-Economic
Classification (NS-SEC) [1].
There is an approach which segregates the bases
of each of the categories: class is grounded in the
economy; gender is a discourse about sexual and biological
differences; ethnicity relates to discourses about exclusion
and inclusion. It can be noted that gender relations
are a complex inequality. A current model is found in
modernization theory as applied to gender relations.
According to this approach, economic development is
seen to increase women's employment which in turn
erodes the traditional family form and then all other forms
of gender inequality. A key focus was on the duality of
family-welfare state relationship to produce distinctive
varieties of male breadwinner regimes. There are differences
in the extent to which there is a ‘male breadwinner-
female housewife’ model, ranging from ‘strong male
breadwinner’ and ‘modified male breadwinner’ to ‘weak
male breadwinner’ (sometimes referred to as ‘dual earner’).
Ireland, for example, is taken as most typical of the strong
male breadwinner model, with Britain sometimes being
included, while others such as Germany, are seen as a
modified male breadwinner model. Sweden is seen to
follow a weak male breadwinner model and sometimes
dual earner [3]. There are domestic and public forms of
gender regime for women. In the state with the domestic
gender regime women are only rarely present in the formal
institutions of political power, such as parliaments,
cabinets, and the governing bodies of organized religions.
In the public gender regime women are present in these
institutions [3].
Ethnic relations are also complex inequalities. Ethnic
groups usually take themselves as sharing a common
background and heritage in contrast to other types of
groups [3]. „The minoritization of some ethnic groups
is an active process and not pregiven, and involves the
economy, polity, violence, and civil society, even though
dominant ethnic groups will often treat themselves as
the norm without an ethnicity” [3].
Further regimes of complex inequalities are disability
and sexual orientation. According to Walby (2009),
disability is considered as a medical matter concerning
impaired bodies and as having little to do with society.
However, the environment may be enabling or disabling.
An impaired body is only disable if the environment is
disabling. For example, with contact lenses a person with
poor eyesight is not visually disabled. In economic sense
a disabling environment may mean that people with
impairments have difficulty earning a good income
while economic resources are needed to ensure that an
environment is not disabling. Disability has a political
dimension (access to political power), violence component
and a civil society dimension. As for the sexual orientation,
there can be discrimination in employment and in
access to resources. There can be risks of violence and
harassment against gay and lesbian people [3].
„Regimes of inequality intersect within each
institutional domain and there are usually multiple regimes
within each such domain. Each regime of complex
inequality is constituted in the institutional domains of
civil society, economy, polity, and violence. When
addressing class inequalities the most frequent focus has
been on the economy, with only a secondary interest in
culture and civil society” [3].
Inequality on Labour Markets
According to Blossfeld et al. (2011), the form and
extent of labour market flexibility may strongly vary in
the different regimes of Europe and should be shaped
decisively by the given configuration of country-specific
labour markets, welfare states, and education systems.
The author says that in regimes with a low degree of
flexibility in their labour markets (e.g., Germany, the
Netherlands, Italy, Spain), the globalization process should
have led to an increasing division of society into a strongly
protected group of high earners and ever-larger
marginalized group of people who have difficulties in
finding stable employment. In these systems well-qualified
male employees in their mid-career are firmly and securely
L. V. Rudenko, P. O. Steshenko
Table 1
Registrar General’s Social Class scheme
Social Class Occupations Examples
I Professional Solicitor, doctor
II Managerial and technical Manager, nurse
IIIN Skilled non-manual Secretary, receptionist
IIIM Skilled manual Electrician, hairdresser
IV Partly skilled Caretaker, hospital porter
V Unskilled Cleaner, labourer
Source: Butler / Watt (2007), p. 6
13
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
established in the labour market and today are strongly
protected against the competition of job seekers. In
flexible labour market regimes, employment risks are
alleviated by relatively rapid integration or reintegration
chances. This is less possible in systems with well-
protected insiders. Hence, this means that in countries
with less flexible labour markets, the growing economic
competition resulting from the globalization process has
led to a sudden increase in labour market risks, above all
for young people starting their careers, women after
employment breaks and the unemployed and unqualified.
In Southern European regimes, the inequalities between
insiders and outsiders in the globalization process are even
stronger than in conservative regimes, because their labour
market structures are more inelastic and the welfare state
is far more fragmented than in the conservative countries
of Central Europe [2].
Differences in labour earnings inequality (inequality
among those who earn an income from employment) and
labour income inequality (inequality among all people in the
working-age population) are influenced by cross-country
differences in wage rates, hours worked and inactivity rates.
Among the OECD countries, earnings inequality for full-
time employees is highest in Chile, the United States and
Portugal, while Switzerland, Belgium and Denmark are the
most equal countries. Inequality is generally higher for all
the full-time employed, reflecting the wider dispersion of
earnings among the self-employed [7].
The Gini coefficient is a commonly used measure
of inequality. A Gini coefficient of zero represents
complete equality, where income is shared equally among
all households. A Gini coefficient of 100 represents
complete inequality, where only one household has all
the income and the rest have none [4]. „Extending the
analysis to part-time workers, the unemployed and the
inactive raises the Gini index, reflecting the large income
differentials for these groups and the group of full-time
workers (unemployed individuals and the inactive enter
the calculation with zero income as transfers are not taken
into account). The increase in the Gini index is particularly
large for countries where part-time workers make up a
sizable share of total employment and for countries with
a high unemployment rate and many inactive people of
working age. While the Gini indices of the population
sub-groups are highly correlated (the correlation
coefficients are between 0.8 and 0.9), there are several
countries, such as Belgium, Italy and Estonia, for which
the choice of the group matters considerably for the
inequality ranking” [7].
Effects of Democracy and Economic Openness
There are considerable differences in the level of
disposable income inequality across rich countries.
Mexico and Russia have the most unequal distributions,
followed by English-speaking countries together
with Southern European countries. Other continental
European nations come next, and the Nordic countries
show the lowest level of inequality. Most Eastern European
countries show low to medium levels of inequality, while
Taiwan and Japan are in an intermediate position [5].
„This clustering owes much to the working of the national
tax-and-benefit systems, which play a considerable role
in narrowing the original market income distribution” [5].
Li and Reuveny (2009) have demonstrated the need
to study the effects on income inequality of economic
openness and democracy together. They claimed that
better theoretical explanations of inequality should
consider economic openness and democracy together.
Their statistical findings indicate that the trade openness
tends to be associated with more equitable income
distribution within countries, but foreign direct investments
leads to greater income inequality, and foreign financial
capital inflows do not have any significant effect on
income inequality. A rise in democracy reduces the level
of income inequality within countries. In addition,
democratic governance mediates and weakens the
undesirable impact of foreign direct investment on income
inequality in the OECD world but not in developed
countries [6].
Progress indicators
There are four major types of approach to progress
in the contemporary global era: economic development,
equality, human rights and capabilities. Increases in
economic development are linked to increases in other
aspects of the good life [3]. According to Walby (2009),
the main challenge is to use the indicators of economic
development as measures of progress. There are also
other matters that are important, including human rights
and a broader notion of human and not just economic
development [3]. „People in the countries in the
OECD have the highest incomes, those in Sub-Saharan
Africa are lowest” [3]. Financial aid from developed
countries and international organizations to less developed
countries should be designed to reduce poverty [6].
Equality is the main challenge to the acceptance of
progress as economic development [3].
Walby (2009) indicates that class-based economic
inequalities within countries are increasing in many
countries, while gender-based economic inequalities
within countries are often declining. „When the whole
world is taken as the unit within which to analyse
inequality rather than individual countries, then the
centuries-long increase in global economic inequalities
has stopped as a result of the surging economic growth
in China and to a lesser extent India. There has been an
increase in the democratic access to power, not only an
increase in a narrowly defined suffrage-democracy but
also the increased presence of women in parliaments
(though this is not so everywhere)” [3]. There is some
L. V. Rudenko, P. O. Steshenko
14
Економічний вісник Донбасу № 4 (34), 2013
reduction in the use of violence as a form of power
against women [3].
Conclusion
This paper wants to emphasize an impact of existing
socio-economic inequalities on the modern society. Firstly
it has briefly represented complex inequalities such as
class, gender, ethnic relations and other inequalities like
disability and sexual orientation. Problems of income
inequality are given a particular place in this paper. The
current situation on labour market is briefly analyzed by
describing labour income inequality and employment
inequalities in different countries. The Gini coefficient is
still a commonly used measure of inequality. However,
Li and Reuveny have demonstrated an improved
methodology of measuring income inequality by adding
effects of democracy, trade openness, foreign direct
investments and foreign financial capital inflows. Their
main suggestion is to reduce poverty with the help of
financial aid from developed countries and international
organizations to less developed countries. And finally four
major types of approach to progress such as economic
development, equality, human rights and capabilities
are introduced in this work. The last findings show
that class-based economic inequalities within countries
are increasing in many countries, while gender-based
economic inequalities within countries are often declining.
Also an increasing influence of democracy on inequalities
and some reduction in the use of violence are seen in a
modern society. Therefore, it can be expected that some
inequalities will be lower, and this can improve the socio-
economic situation in the world.
References
1. Butler, Tim / Watt, Paul (2007), Understanding
social inequality, London, Sage. 2. Blossfeld, Hans-
Peter / Buchholz, Sandra / Hofä cker, Dirk / Kolb, Kathrin
(2011), Globalized labour markets and social inequality
in Europe, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan. 3. Walby,
Sylvia (2009), Globalization and inequalities: complexity
and contested modernities, Los Angeles, Sage. 4. Ridge,
Tess / Wright, Sharon (2008), Understanding inequality,
poverty and wealth: policies and prospects, Bristol, Policy
Press. 5. Beramendi, Pablo / Anderson, Christopher (2008),
Democracy, inequality and representation: a comparative
perspective, New York, Russell Sage Foundation.
6. Li, Quan / Reuveny, Rafael (2009), Democracy and
economic openness in an interconnected system: complex
transformations, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
7. Hoeller, Peter / Joumard, Isabelle / Pisu, Mauro / Bloch,
Debra (2012), “Less Income Inequality and More
Growth – Are They Compatible? Part 1 Mapping Income
Inequality Across the OECD”, OECD Economics
Department Working Papers, No. 924, OECD Publishing.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k9h297wxbnr-en
Руденко Л. В., Стешенко П. О. Соціально-
економічна нерівність у сучасному суспільстві
Базуючись на актуальних даних, ця стаття пока-
зує, як розвиваються складові соціально-економічної
нерівності у сучасному суспільстві. Посилаючись на
дослідження Сильвії Валбі, Тіма Батлера, Пола Ватта,
Куана Лі, Рафаеля Рувені, Блоссфкльда, Пабло Бера-
менді, Крістофера Андерсена, Пітера Холлера та ін.,
ця робота розглядає нерівність як масовий феномен та
феномен, що поширюється, а також більш конкретно
висвітлює засоби його вимірювання та аспекти. В ре-
зультаті знайдено шляхи удосконалення суспільства,
в цілому, а також прогрес у сфері дослідження пода-
ної проблеми.
Ключові слова: комплексна нерівність, нерівність
доходів, соціальний клас, коефіцієнт Джині, відкритість
економіки.
Руденко Л. В., Стешенко П. А. Социально-эко-
номическое неравенство в современном обществе
Основываясь на актуальных данных, данная ста-
тья показывает, как развиваются составляющие со-
циально-экономического неравенства в современном
обществе. Ссылаясь на исследования Сильвии Валби,
Тима Батлера, Пола Ватта, Куана Ли, Рафаэля Рувени,
Блоссфельда, Пабло Бераменди, Кристофера Андерсе-
на, Питера Холлера и др., данная работа рассматривает
неравенство как массовый и распространяющийся фе-
номен, а также более конкретно освещает средства его
измерения и аспекты. В заключение выявляются пути
совершенствования общества в целом, а также про-
гресс в области исследования данной проблемы.
Ключевые слова: комплексное неравенство, не-
равенство доходов, социальный класс, коэффициент
Джини, открытость экономики.
Rudenko L. V., Steshenko P. O. Socio-economic
Inequality in Modern Society
Based on up-to-date data, this paper wants to show
how different patterns of social and economic inequality
develop in modern society. Referring to the research by
Sylvia Walby, Tim Butler and Paul Watt, Quan Li and
Rafael Reuveny, Blossfeld et al., Pablo Beramendi and
Christopher J. Anderson, Peter Hoeller, this paper
considers inequality as a massive and extending
phenomenon as well as describes more precisely income
inequality measurement and aspects. Finally it determines
the directions of society's improvement and describes a
progress in this field of studying.
Key words: complex inequality, income inequality,
social class, Gini index, economic openness.
Received by the editors: 09.10.2013
and final form 04.12.2013
L. V. Rudenko, P. O. Steshenko
|