Inequality Studies from the Global South

David Francis, Imraan Valodia, Edward Webster

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781000061918
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Sociology
• Index: Social Sciences

This book offers an innovative, interdisciplinary approach to thinking about inequality, and to understanding how inequality is produced and reproduced in the global South.

Without the safety net of the various Northern welfare states, inequality in the global South is not merely a socio-economic problem, but an existential threat to the social contract that underpins the democratic state and society itself. Only a response that is firmly grounded in the context of the global South can hope to address this problem. This collection brings together scholars from across the globe, with a particular focus on the global South, to address broad thematic areas such as the conceptual and methodological challenges of measuring inequality; the political economy of inequality in the global South; inequality in work, households and the labour market; and inequalities in land, spaces and cities. The book concludes by suggesting alternatives for addressing inequality in the global South and around the world.

The pioneering ideas and theories put forward by this volume make it essential reading for students and researchers of global inequality across the fields of sociology, economics, law, politics, global studies and development studies.

Part 1

Conceptual questions on inequality in the South

While inequality is a global problem, our interest is primarily in the global South where, we argue, inequality takes particular forms, and how we think about inequality is at the core of any project seeking to address it. What do we mean by equality and inequality? Inequality of what? Is inequality necessary? Why? Equality of what, and for whom? Secondly, how do we conceptualise and measure these various types of inequality? The three chapters in this section engage with some foundational conceptual and methodological questions about the study of inequality in the global South.

The premise of Chapter 1, by Edward Webster, Imraan Valodia and David Francis, is that the process of global knowledge production is not neutral, and that where we study inequality matters for how we understand it and how we address it. In addition to shifting the locus of inequality studies to the global South, it is also important to move beyond only money-metric understanding of inequality, to one which is both located in the historical context and is interdisciplinary. What, then, is involved in thinking about inequality in the South? Usually little consideration is given to the question of producing a set of conceptual categories from the lived experience, intellectual traditions and social practices of the global South. We need to proceed from a position that theories produced elsewhere (“Northern theories”) might have little explanatory power unless they engage with local ways of looking at and living in the world. In Chapter 2, Dilip Menon argues that we need to think about the question of hierarchy as a value in the global South, and that inequality and hierarchy may not be the same thing.

Finally, we turn to some methodological questions about measuring inequality. Is it possible to compare inequality of income – a useful measure, and proxy for wider inequalities – between countries in the global South, given the challenge of obtaining accurate and comparable data? In Chapter 3, James K. Galbraith and Jaehee Choi summarise an empirical project that has produced a consistent global panel of income inequality estimates. Their work integrates Southern economies with their Northern counterparts in a single frame of reference, illustrating the structural and political elements behind comparative levels of inequality. They demonstrate that the global macroeconomics of financialisation, debt crises and exchange rate movements play an essential role in the evolution of economic inequality over time. Taken together, the chapters in this section present a new approach to conceptualising, understanding and measuring inequality in the global South in a way that rejects universalist explanations of inequality while avoiding reductionism.

1 Towards a Southern approach to inequality

Inequality studies in South Africa and the global South

Edward Webster , Imraan Valodia and David Francis

Introduction

The University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) has embarked on a multi-partner research and policy project focusing on understanding and addressing inequality, and building a collaborative South-focused research institution to strengthen and sustain this work. Our starting premise is that while technical solutions to addressing inequality are very important, by themselves these will not be politically feasible unless the social, economic and political forces driving high levels of inequality in South Africa are clearly understood and addressed. While inequality is a global problem, our interest is primarily in the global South, where, we argue, inequality takes particular forms. Locating our study and addressing inequality in South Africa will also enable us to enter into a dialogue about inequality in other settings, particularly in the rest of the global South. The global South is emerging at the forefront in the use of, inter alia, socio-economic rights and the law to achieve social change. Crucially, widening inequalities between and within countries are coupled with the persistence of poverty. The objective of our study is a comprehensive and broadly shared understanding of how inequality is produced and reproduced in South Africa and in comparable countries in the global South, and the identification of the sources of power that can address and overcome this inequality.

South Africa is something of a paradox. In spite of a powerful internal democratic movement driving resistance to inequality under apartheid, as well as progressive legislation and a constitution that foregrounds the promotion of social and economic rights, economic inequality in the post-apartheid period has deepened.¹ But, if we broaden the definition of inequality beyond resource inequality (income and assets) to include what Goran Therborn calls existential inequality,² then “enormous egalitarian advances have been made in race, settler–indigenous, gender and sexual relations” (Therborn, 2013: 137). Having to accept that black people have their own history, or that people of the same sex may legally marry, may be culturally offensive to some, but because “it has been decoupled from resource inequality … powerful elites have found the issue a gift of costless egalitarianism” (Therborn, 2013: 145). Indeed, Therborn believes that globally, existential egalitarianism is the great “success story” of the past half-century. It begins in 1945 with “the total defeat of Nazi Germany, militaristic Japan and Fascist Italy” (Therborn, 2013: 137–8). It set the stage for the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in December 1948, and the human rights victories that followed – the decolonisation of the colonies of Africa, Latin America and Asia, the defeat of institutionalised racism in the United States and eventually South Africa, and the breakthrough of women’s rights in the 1970s.

Manoranjan Mohanty, although less optimistic than Therborn, argues something similar when he writes:

All constitutions affirm the right to equality before law for all citizens. … [but] … at the same time, the trend of increasing social and economic inequality within and between countries and regions has been prominently noticeable in recent decades. Inequality of incomes in countries such as the United States, India, and China has continued to rise, with occasional slight fluctuations.

(Mohanty, 2018: 2)

But unlike Therborn, Mohanty emphasises the persistence of existential inequality: “Discrimination on the basis of caste in India, race in the United States and South Africa, ethnicity in China and many other countries, and gender in all countries persists even though laws prohibit it” (Mohanty, 2018: 3). Whether one adopts Therborn’s optimistic view of the successful emergence of an egalitarian movement or the more sceptical view of Mohanty, both approach inequality from a multidimensional perspective. Inequality is not just about one’s bank balance. It is, in Therborn’s (2013: 10) words, “a violation of human dignity; it is a denial of the possibility for everybody’s capabilities to develop”.

In framing this debate, we begin with the assumption that inequality is a power relationship. It is not just about differences between individuals, groups, regions or countries. Differences are given or chosen, while inequalities are socially constructed (Therborn, 2013: 38). Inequality is about the conditions that allow certain groups to dominate over others (Mohanty, 2018: 6). In this volume we engage with inequality from the perspective of the global South. The term global South mainly refers to the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, even though, geographically, many of them are located north of the equator. There are three common features in our understanding of the term global South (Mohanty, 2018). First, these countries are mostly former colonies or semi-colonies that are engaged in consolidating their independence. Second, their economic conditions remain underdeveloped compared to those of the former colonial powers or the developed countries of Europ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Endorsements
• Half-Title
• Series
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• List of contributors
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Abbreviations and acronyms
• PART 1 Conceptual questions on inequality in the South
• PART 2 The political economy of inequality in the global South
• PART 3 Work, households and the labour market
• PART 4 Land, space and cities
• PART 5 Alternatives
• Index