Social Inequalities
Big Data, Small Area symposium to celebrate 30 years of the Small Area Health Statistics Unit (SAHSU)
Danny Dorling
November 15th 2017
1. Social Inequalities
Danny Dorling
November 15th 2017
Big Data, Small
Area symposium to
celebrate 30 years
of the Small Area
Health Statistics
Unit (SAHSU)
30 years ago I drew
maps like this one:
2. I was trying to understand a country that in the late 1980s felt very
divided and that even 1981 census data showed to be dividing with
counter-urbanisation favouring rural areas. All that changed by Brexit
time, the summer of 2016 and we got a very different map:
3. Change over
time
In hindsight, as the
country voted to join
the European
Community in the
mid 1970s it was also
already beginning to
spatially polarize.
Outer London
surburbs were
turning more blue.
4. Today across Europe this map of cross-border migration in 2014
showed most of Britain to have more in common with Eastern Europe.
5. The antecedents to the vote: the rapid decline in living
standards after 2010, failing health and rapidly rising
mortality due to austerity â recorded in part of the
âhappinessâ index.
Source: understanding society â note there was one change to method of
recording at one point â Figures published in JRSS(A) 2016.
7. 1997
1998
19992000
20012002
2003
2004
2005 2006
2007 2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
-3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
In the UK populist votes
after the era of the
National Front were
purchased. First in 1997 by
the Referendum party.
There is not a settled
populist opinion. The vote
was driven up in 1999,
2004, 2009 and 2014, the
dates of each EU wide
election. Newspaper
ownership to direct target
marketing to 52:48
spending.
The rise in Labour
popularity is a very
different much faster
change â not purchased.
We now have bigpolling data â on average a poll a day since 2010
We can track public opinion to see how populism is whipped up in the UK
14. Weâre back to 1936 in terms of what lies
behind these trends.
But isnât this happening everywhere â
itâs just the âglobal raceâ isnât it?
15. The very long term picture: The
Netherlands today is as equitable as the 13
American colonies were in 1775.
(and the UK maxed on equity around 1968)
Source: Lindert, P. H. and Williamson, J. G. (2016) Unequal Gains:
American growth and inequality since 1700, Princeton: Princeton
University Press, figure 5.4. Reproduced with permission from Peter
16. Many are not aware of the extent of inequality
How much more do the best-off tenth get a
year as compared to the worst?
I published this table of inequality in the richest large 25 countries in the world in 2010
17. Some people in some countries tolerate
far greater inequalities than others
This is the middle of the table and by this measure the Netherlands is in the middle of the table
18. And in some the differences have become so
great that people find it hard to see each
other as people (of equal worth)
19. What happens if we update the inequality
data from 2010 to 2015?
Country by 2015
(real 90:10 ratio)
Income
Inequality
United States 20.3
Singapore 18.5
Israel 17.4
United Kingdom 17.4
Canada 14.5
Spain 13.6
Greece 12.7
Italy 11.3
Ireland 11.1
Germany 10.4
Portugal 10.1
South Korea 10.1
Finland 9.2
Australia 8.8
Netherlands 8.6
New Zealand 8.2
France 7.4
Japan 7.3
Austria 7.0
Switzerland 6.7
Sweden 6.3
Norway 6.2
Belgium 5.9
Slovenia 5.5
Denmark 5.2
The small print
The richest 25 countries in the world in 2009
with populations over 1 million. According to
the IMF's World Economic Outlook Database,
April 2015, this category would now include
Kuwait, UAE, Hong Kong and Qatar in place of
Slovenia, Greece, Portugal and Spain.
Luxembourg, Iceland and San Marino are not
included given populations below 1 million.
Income is now disposable household income:
income from wages, self-employment and
capital, plus social transfers, minus direct taxes
paid. Household income is adjusted
(âequivalisedâ) to take account of the amount of
scale economies that different sizes of
households can achieve. [In chart one it is more
crude].
Both the New York Times Income Distribution
Database and OECD Income Database divide all
income components by the square root of the
number of household members.
20. Inequality for 90% of people in the UK
had been falling since 1990.
For 99% since about 2001.
Among the 99.5%
since (possibly)
2012. But
overall it
roseâŠ
21. Possibly until by mid 2017? (note: this is
income inequality not wealth inequality)
On Thursday 3rd August 2017 the High Pay Centre reported
that the 100 CEOs of the UKâs highest valued public companies
had, on average, seen their pay reduced by 17 per cent in the
year to 2016. Now, instead of (again on average) receiving ÂŁ5.4
million a year they each only took home ÂŁ4.5 million, or 129
times average pay rather than 145 times. We may be at a
turning point.
22. UK
Finland
Japan
Ireland
Singapore
Germany
Italy
Sweden
Australia
Portugal
Korea
Netherlands
Denmark
Switzerland
Spain
France
Norway
New Zealand
Alabama
California
Hawaii
Utah
Oklahoma
Mississippi
Arkansas
Louisiana
Florida
Wisconsin
Texas
Pennsylvania
Washington
Massachusetts
New York
New Jersey
Connecticut
Iowa
Colorado
Minnesota
Oregon
Nebraska
N Dakota
Nevada
S Dakota
Virginia
Alaska
Wyoming
Kansas
Missouri
S Carolina
Illinois
Tennessee
(D of)
Columbia
Maryland
Michigan
Idaho
Montana
New Mexico
W Virginia
Kentucky
Rhode Island
Vermont
New Hampshire
Georgia
N Carolina
Indiana
Ohio
Maine
Delaware
Arizona
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
The take of the 1% in each country and US state in 1983 (%)
0.01
0.10
1.00
10.00
IntellectualPropertyRightsregistered2006-2015(per10,000people)
Note: Canada is not included as it is not a member of the Madrid Agreement
Concerning the International Registration of Marks.
Source: World Wealth and Income database accessed December 2016, and patent
data from the US Patent and Trademark Office and the WIPO statistics database.
Last updated December 2016
Figure 8.1: The take of the 1% in 1983 and patents per person in
2006-2015 (log scale)
Add the States of the USA to see a fuller
picture of, say pollution, or creativity
(patents).
WHY INEQUALITY MATTERS
23. World Bank (2015) UN Inter-agency
Group for Child Mortality Estimation
Singapore
United States
New Zealand
Japan
United Kingdom
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 5 10 15 20 25
InfantMortalityRate
Income Inequality (Decile Group 10:1 Ra o)
Income inequality against infant mortality rates
2015
Canada
Switzerland
Israel
Spain
Portugal
Finland
Slovenia
Singapore
United States
Australia
New Zealand
Ireland
France
Greece
Italy
Canada
Japan
United Kingdom
Norway
Denmark
Netherlands
Germany
South Korea
Austria
Belgium
25. Inequality effects us all
âą As it rises we trust each other less
âą We understand each other less
âą We learn less well and compete more
âą Exam results become ever more important
âą Over and above actually learning
âą Take ability in mathematics as an example
âą And test whether we are really learning well
26. Singapore
Japan
United Kingdom
Sweden
Greece
South Korea
United States
440
460
480
500
520
540
560
580
600
0 5 10 15 20 25
MathsAbility(MeanPISAScore)
Income Inequality (Decile Group 10:1 Ra o)
Income inequality and 15 year-olds' maths ability
2012
Singapore
Japan
Netherlands
Canada
Germany
Australia
Slovenia
New Zealand
United Kingdom
Portugal
Spain
Sweden
Greece
South Korea
Switzerland
Finland
Belgium
Austria
Ireland
Denmark
France
Norway
Italy
United States
Israel
OECD Pisa 2012 Results
27. Japan
United Kingdom
France
United States
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
0 5 10 15 20 25
MathsAbilityat16-24years(MeanScore)
Income Inequality (Decile Group 10:1 Ra o)
Income inequality and 16-24 year-olds' maths ability
2012
Japan
Netherlands
Canada
Germany
Australia
United Kingdom
Spain
Sweden
South Korea
Finland
Austria
Ireland
Denmark
France
Norway
Italy
United States
Data missing for Israel, Greece, Portugal, Slovenia,
Belgium, New Zealand, Switzerland and Singapore
OECD Skills Outlook (2013)
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC)
28. To begin to conclude (1 of 3)
Inequality is about context
The great irony in talking about social inequality at a conference about âBig
Dataâ and âSmall Areasâ is that the key evidence that inequality matters comes
from small datasets about very big areas (whole countries).
People in affluent countries with wide economic and especially income
inequalities suffer much more often from a range of social problems as
compared to other affluent countries. The initial range was identified in the
2009 book âThe Spirit Levelâ. Today the range is far wider, including educational
and environmental effects.
29. It is not just scientific skepticism and
very small datasets that are the problem
Criticism of a concern with economic inequality has come from a small group
of people including those sponsored by tobacco companies and working with
far-right political organizations.
Again, ironically, there now appears to be a relationship even between such
political attitudes and inequality. This lecture has shown some examples of the
wider range of social and health harms that appear to be associated with
inequality as well as touching on the idea that living under prolonged high
levels of inequality damages how we think.
30. If you donât understand inequality you will blame
the victims
For those interested in outcomes at a neighbourhood
level, or in harnessing the power of very large datasets,
knowledge of the potential importance of national context
is crucial to avoid âblame the victimâ errors. This talk is
partly based on a new book âDo We Need Economic
Inequality?
As you might guess the
answer is, not at the levels
We have recently âenjoyedâ.
But no one knows the optimal
Level of equality / inequality.
Hinweis der Redaktion
Source: World Bank Database [Online].World Development Indicators. Accessed July 2015. Accessible: http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/2.21#. Original source: Estimates developed by the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (UNICEF, WHO, World Bank, UN DESA Population Division) at www.childmortality.org.
Indicator: Infant mortality rate is the number of infants dying before reaching one year of age, per 1,000 live births in a given year.
Source: OECD Pisa 2012 Results (2012) [Online]. Accessible from: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf
Indicator: Mean PISA score for Mathematics in 2012 survey. PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) is the world's global metric for quality, equity and efficiency in school education. It assesses the extent to which 15 year old students have acquired key knowledge and skills in mathematics that are essential for full participation in modern societies. Around 510000 students completed the assessment in 2012 representing about 28 million 15 year olds in the schools of the 65 participating countires and economies (all 34 OECD member countries and 31 partner economies).
Source: OECD Skills Outlook (2013) Table A2.7 [Online] Accessible from: http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/Skills%20volume%201%20(eng)--full%20v12--eBook%20(04%2011%202013).pdf Original Source: Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) (2012) Data missing for Israel, Greece, Portugal, New Zealand, Belgium, Switzerland and Singapore.
Indicator: Adjusted mean proficiency in numeracy among 16-24 year olds - the adjusted mean includes adults who were not able to provide background information because of language difficulties, or learning or mental disabilities (literacy-related non-response). They are attributed a very low score (85 points), which represents a lower bound for the mean score in each country.