Inequality and Human Development

The research carried out in the programme thus far has strengthened its conviction that not all differences can be considered inequalities. There are differences, such as academic achievements, that are celebrated, just as there are others, including extreme variations in basic living standards, that are reviled. Consequently, the programme treats only ethically unacceptable differences as inequalities. It recognizes two routes to deciding what is ethically unacceptable: the path of rational argument and that of beliefs. Differences that are considered unethical on the basis of rational argument are termed normative inequalities, while those that are considered unethical based on beliefs that are not considered necessary to be defended rationally, are termed descriptive inequalities. This approach to inequality extends the phenomenon well beyond its economic dimensions. Correspondingly the effects of inequality on development extend far beyond its impact on growth. If, following Amartya Sen, we treat development as freedom, there is a need to assess the impact of inequality on the economic, social, political, and other freedoms of individuals, groups, and society as a whole.

This project explores the relationship between inequality and a selection of freedoms. To begin with, it will examine the relationship between inequality and the freedom to lead a healthy life, the freedom to be educated, and the freedom to escape absolute deprivation. It will then go on to explore the relationship between inequality and some of the other aspects of what persons want to do or be, as well as their capabilities to do so.

As has happened across the world at least over the last two and a half centuries, development in India has been marked by a substantial movement away from agriculture. This has typically been accompanied by movement of the population from rural to urban areas. Earlier IHDP research on the inequalities of rural transformation in India, however, brought to the fore the divergence between these two transitions: while the share of agriculture in GDP has declined dramatically, the process of urbanization has been much less rapid. This has led to four different responses in terms of migration. There is migration hesitancy in areas where jobs available from dispersed industrialization can be tapped while continuing to reside in the village; when industrialization is not available in the vicinity of the village there is permanent migration out of that rural setting; when permanent migration to an expensive city is unaffordable there is short-term migration in an effort to earn in the city and spend in the village; and when none of these options are available there is migration from one rural area to another as well as the return to the village of migrants who are unable to find a foothold in the city.

The four migration related responses to a declining agriculture point to a number of inequalities that the programme seeks to address. At the very outset there is the question of who gets to migrate. It is often the case that the very poor households, typically belonging to traditionally disadvantaged social groups, lack the financial and social capital to engage in economic migration. Within the household, socio-cultural norms often restrict women’s mobility to distant labour markets. In other words, socio-economic inequalities create what can be termed as ‘left-behind populations’ that emerge from the inequality between those who get to migrate and those who don’t, and then form a part of the changing inequalities that remain in the village. Those who do migrate – either short-term or permanently – face a variety of inequalities in the processes of migration. There are the inequalities in the learning of the skills needed in urban centres; differences that are accentuated by the informality of the processes learning. The need for short-term migrants to rely on identity groups to bargain for jobs in the city can at times extend existing inequalities in the village to the processes of migration, even as the earnings of migrants can alter inequalities in the village. And the sheer volume of migrants, both permanent and temporary, as well as the informality they bring with them, alters the nature of inequality in the urban centre as well. This project will explore aspects of inequalities in three elements of migration: inequalities of those left behind, inequalities in the processes of migration including in the learning of skills, and urban inequalities generated by migration.

The process of transformation out of agriculture has altered the relations between humans and nature in a number of ways. There has been a change in land use that has affected forests as well as cultivated land. There have also been increasing demands on other natural resources. If we take technology to be the intended changes in the relationship between humans and nature, this process generates a wide range of inequalities. There are the inequalities that emerge from the redistribution of resources brought about by technology. These inequalities may be most visible in the case of natural resources, as when technological development destroys forests. But technology can also redistribute human resources, as when labour displacing technologies reduce employment. The access to technological products are often marked by differences that are ethically unacceptable. Technology also goes beyond physical space, affecting the way people think about themselves and about others. The access to technology is often presented in a way that celebrates inequality, as in the display of an ultra-modern car.

This project seeks to explore the multiple dimensions of inequality in technological change through the lens of a single set of products, those created by digital technologies. Digital technologies are a new site for modern incarnations of inequality, given how they are a realm of experience and activity not separate from the social. Uncovering socio-technological inequalities is integral to charting out the realities of socio-economic transformation in terms of novel vulnerabilities, precarities, and uncertainties that these inequalities spawn.

The movement out of agriculture in India is taking place in the midst of another, and arguably larger, transformation, that of climate change. The process of moving out of agriculture can be hastened by climate change, especially when there are increased instances of drought and abnormal rainfall. On the other side of the coin, as farmers respond to the economic pressures of agrarian transformation by resorting to low-cost options like stubble burning, they add to the challenges of climate change. The causes and effects of climate change have inequalities built into them. Those who contribute the most to climate change are often not the ones who pay the greatest price. This is an inequality that has been articulated effectively on the global stage by countries like India, but there is much less recognition of these inequalities within the country. There are also inequalities in the ability to cope with climate change. The inequalities in the ability to cope could be determined by the processes of rural transformation as well as in the patterns of climate change.

This project focuses not just on the unequal costs of climate change but also how local populations, already in the midst of socio-economic transformation, cope with the larger change that has been thrust upon them. The project is designed to study the local adaptations to climate change in an areas that covers diverse forms of socio-economic transformation as well as varied consequences of climate change.

As individuals cope with socio-economic transformations in the midst of climate change they also have to deal with the transformations in their bodies and minds as they become older. There may be the odd individual who sees this difference over time as somehow unfair and hence an inequality, but it is more likely that this will be recognized as a natural process that has to be accepted. What may not necessarily be as ethically acceptable would be differences from the younger population in the conditions faced by the elderly within the home and outside. These intergenerational inequalities could also vary across social groups and on the basis of gender.

This project looks at ethically unacceptable differences across age groups in times of socio-economic and climate change. Among the questions it asks is whether intergenerational inequality is neutral to climate change and socio-economic transformations.