Continuance of Manual Scavenging: Intergroup Inequality or Policy Paralysis?

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 28-41
Author(s):  
Narender Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Intergroup Inequality

Intergroup Inequality in Wealth Ownership in Rural India: Caste, Tribe and Religion

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-132
Author(s):  
Nitin Tagade ◽  
Sukhadeo Thorat
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Agricultural Land ◽  
Wealth Inequality ◽  
Sample Survey ◽  
Rural India ◽  
Unequal Distribution ◽  
Majority Population ◽  
Intergroup Inequality ◽  
The Impact

In India, the rural economy still remains crucially important in the economic wellbeing of the majority population. The low income and high poverty in rural areas are closely associated with unequal distribution of income-earning assets, particularly agricultural land and non-land capital assets. In this article, therefore, we try to understand the intergroup inequality in wealth ownership across caste, ethnic and religious groups in rural India based on the 2013 data from the All India Debt and Investment survey carried out by National Sample Survey Office. The results indicate high interpersonal wealth inequality so also the intergroup wealth inequality at the aggregate level and by type of assets in rural India. The impact of caste on the ownership of wealth clearly indicates high ownership among Hindu high caste and Hindu other backward caste at the cost of low wealth share or ownership of the SC/ST indicating the existence of graded inequality.

Beyond prejudice: Relational inequality, collective action, and social change revisited

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 451-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dixon ◽  
Mark Levine ◽  
Steve Reicher ◽  
Kevin Durrheim
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Dominant Group ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
Main Target ◽  
Subordinate Group ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Intergroup Inequality

AbstractThis response clarifies, qualifies, and develops our critique of the limits of intergroup liking as a means of challenging intergroup inequality. It does not dispute that dominant groups may espouse negative attitudes towards subordinate groups. Nor does it dispute that prejudice reduction can be an effective way of tackling resulting forms of intergroup hostility. What it does dispute is the assumption that getting dominant group members and subordinate group members to like each other more is the best way of improving intergroup relations that are characterized by relatively stable, institutionally embedded, relations of inequality. In other words, the main target of our critique is the model of change that underlies prejudice reduction interventions and the mainstream concept of “prejudice” on which they are based.

scholarly journals The Origins of Intergroup Resource Inequality Influence Children’s Decision to Perpetuate or Rectify Inequality

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing An ◽  
Jing Yu ◽  
Liqi Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Resource Allocation ◽  
Regional Disparity ◽  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
Resource Allocations ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Internal Factor ◽  
Intergroup Inequality ◽  
Different Origins ◽  
Factor Difference

Previous studies have explored children’s intergroup resource allocation in the context of preexisting intergroup resource inequality. However, resource inequality between social groups often originates from different factors. This study explored the role of the origins of resource inequality on children’s intergroup resource allocations. In experiment 1, when there was no explicit origin of the intergroup inequality, children of different ages mainly allocated resources in an equal way and 5- to 6-year-olds showed ingroup bias. In experiment 2, we examined the influence of different origins of intergroup inequality and found that 5- to 6-year-olds perpetuated intergroup inequality when resource inequality was based on either a structural (regional disparity) or an internal factor (difference in performance). However, 10- to 11-year-olds rectified inequality or allocated equally when intergroup inequality was based on regional disparity and perpetuated resource inequality when intergroup inequality was based on performance difference. The origins of inequality appear to play an important role in children’s intergroup resource allocations, and older children can distinguish different origins of intergroup inequality in resource allocation.

Collective Guilt as Distress over Illegitimate Intergroup Inequality

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anca M. Miron ◽  
Nyla R. Branscombe ◽  
Michael T. Schmitt
Keyword(s):  
Collective Guilt ◽  
Intergroup Inequality

The Impact of Self-Government, Comprehensive Land Claims, and Opt-In Arrangements on Income Inequality in Indigenous Communities in Canada

2021 ◽  
pp. e2020004
Author(s):  
Krishna Pendakur ◽  
Ravi Pendakur
Keyword(s):  
Income Inequality ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Community Level ◽  
Land Claims ◽  
Percentage Points ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
Intergroup Inequality ◽  
Household Incomes ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Impact

In Canada, self-government agreements, comprehensive land claims agreements, and opt-in arrangements allow Indigenous groups to govern their internal affairs and assume greater responsibility and control over the decision-making that affects their communities. We use difference-in-difference models to measure the impact of such agreements on average income and income inequality in Indigenous communities at the community level. In comparison with earlier work, we additionally use data from the 2016 Census. Our results suggest that comprehensive land claims agreements increase community-level average (log) household incomes by more than C$10 thousand (0.25 log points). Attainment of other agreement types does not increase community-level average incomes. Communities that attain a self-government agreement or an opt-in arrangement related to land management see a decrease in the Gini coefficient for income inequality by 2.0 to 3.5 percentage points. Standalone comprehensive land claims agreements are associated with a smaller decrease of 1.2 percentage points. We also study intergroup inequality and find that an opt-in arrangement increases within-community income disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous households.

scholarly journals Can cross-group contact turn advantaged group members into allies? The role of inequality-delegitimizing contact and interpersonal connection

2021 ◽  
pp. 136843022110152
Author(s):  
Julia C. Becker ◽  
Stephen C. Wright
Keyword(s):  
Negative Effects ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Group Contact ◽  
Intergroup Inequality ◽  
Contact Partner ◽  
First Time ◽  
Group Member

Previous research shows that positive contact with members of disadvantaged groups can have positive, neutral, or negative effects on advantaged group members’ support of actions for social change towards more equality. The present work provides an experimental test of this effect and introduces two moderators which highlight the fundamental role of (a) communication about perception of the illegitimacy of intergroup inequality and (b) interpersonal connection with the contact partner. In two experiments ( N = 88 and N = 192), first-time cross-group contact was initiated between members of two universities that differ on social status. Results revealed that cross-group contact per se did not increase advantaged group members’ solidarity-based action to reduce inequality. However, cross-group contact did increase advantaged group members’ solidarity-based actions when the disadvantaged group partner engaged in inequality-delegitimizing contact by describing the intergroup inequality as illegitimate and when the advantaged group member reported a strong interpersonal connection with the disadvantaged contact partner.

scholarly journals Intergroup inequality and the breakdown of prosociality

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-303
Author(s):  
Rustam Romaniuc ◽  
Gregory J. DeAngelo ◽  
Dimitri Dubois ◽  
Bryan C. McCannon
Keyword(s):  
Intergroup Inequality

scholarly journals Correlations Between Social Dominance Orientation and Political Attitudes Reflect Common Genetic Underpinnings: A Twin Study

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Haarklau Kleppestø
Keyword(s):  
Political Attitudes ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Environmental Correlation ◽  
Twin Design ◽  
Dominance Hierarchies ◽  
The Social ◽  
Underlying Causes ◽  
Distribution Of Power ◽  
Intergroup Inequality ◽  
The Relationship

A foundational question in the social sciences concerns the interplayof underlying causes in the formation of people’s politicalbeliefs and prejudices. What role, if any, do genes, environmentalinfluences, or personality dispositions play? Social DominanceOrientation (SDO), an influential index of people’s general attitudestoward intergroup hierarchy, correlates robustly with politicalbeliefs. SDO consists of the sub-dimensions SDO-Dominance(SDO-D), which is the desire people have for some groups to beactively oppressed by others, and SDO-Egalitarianism (SDO-E), apreference for intergroup inequality. Using a twin design (N =1987), we investigate if the desire for intergroup dominance andinequality makes up a genetically grounded behavioral syndrome.Specifically, we investigate the heritability of SDO, in addition towhether it genetically correlates with support for political policiesconcerning the distribution of power and resources to differentsocial groups. In addition to moderate heritability estimates forSDO-D and SDO-E (37% and 24%, respectively), we find that thegenetic correlation between these sub-dimensions and politicalattitudes was overall high (mean genetic correlation 0.51), whilethe environmental correlation was very low (mean environmentalcorrelation 0.08). This suggests that the relationship betweenpolitical attitudes and SDO-D and SDO-E is grounded in commongenetics, such that the desire for (versus opposition to) intergroupinequality and support for political attitudes that serve to enhance(versus attenuate) societal disparities form convergent strategiesfor navigating group-based dominance hierarchies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document