"Структура" социального неравенства современного мира: проблемы измерения
In the age of globalization, vanishing borders between the countries and the growth of mobility comparative analysis of the societies social structure and the nature of inequality becomes especially timely. This article presents a detailed analysis of the structure and depth of the countries inequality, as well as those of separate groups of countries in a more complex system of parameters. On the basis of the available data the authors attempt to test the hypothesis of the connection of inequality not only with the income level, but also with the imputed income per capita. The authors go beyond the standard instruments of measuring the inequality by income and offer their own modification of the decile exponent of inequality by imputed per capita GDP.
Economic inequality is increasing both within and across countries. Growing inequality has negative economic, social and political consequences, it constrains economic growth, undermines social cohesion and political stability. Eradicating causes of inequality and turning structural barriers to equality into opportunities is fundamental for generating strong, sustainable, balanced and inclusive growth. Transition to this growth model will depend on G20 coherent policy actions globally and nationally.
In the run up to the St. Petersburg G20 summit the Civil 20 initiated preparing a report and recommendations to G20 focused on surmounting the risks originating from growing income inequality. A special Task Force, bringing together experts from G20 member countries has been established to draft the report. Presented and discussed within the Russian G20 Presidency Civil Society Track (www.g20civil.com), the report provides an independent analysis and proposals for a dialogue between a wide range of stakeholders and the G20 governors on the G20 concerted policies and actions to improve economic equality within their countries and beyond.
This set of policy recommendations on how G20 can address inequality takes full account of the existing authoritative, best available, consensus, analysis and evidence of the IMF, OECD, UNDP, other international organizations and relevant scholarly, civil society and policy communities, as summarized above. It builds directly upon the extensive evidence and analysis of the causes and practical policy cures for income inequality in the G20 member countries, as identified in the country reports prepared by and for members of the Civil 20 Task Force on Equity (currently including Australia, Canada, China, France, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Korea, Russia, Turkey and the US).
The Civil 20 propose that G20 leaders at their St. Petersburg summit can act together to improve income and economic equality within their countries and beyond by agreeing the Saint Petersburg Initiative for Strong, Sustainable, Balanced and Inclusive Growth affirming the value of equality and inclusion along with economic growth and efficiency.
We focus on one of these aspects of value theory that has remained relatively underexposed, namely the relation between individual social location and human values. Does one’s position in the social structure—indicated by socio-demographic variables such as age, gender, education and income—affect the values that one prioritizes? We pay special attention to the cross-cultural robustness of the relation between social location and values: Can similar patterns be detected in various European countries? Or do cross-national differences in the relation between structure and values depend on elements of the national context?
We depart from Schwartz’ (1992, 1994, 2006) theory of human values, and make use of the value scale included in the European Social Survey (ESS). We believe that this study adds up to existing research in various ways. First, an exceptionally wide range of European countries is taken into account, including various Eastern European countries. Second, we take up the issue of the cross-cultural equivalence of the measurements. Prior to substantive analysis, we test to what extent different cultural interpretations of values affect the validity of cross-national comparisons. Third, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that explicitly addresses the question whether national context affects the relation between social location and values.
The article is dedicated to the review of ways of looking at social space in the sociological theory. Basing on works of those authors, who paid special attention for this question, in the text there is considered the variety of theoretical interpretations and instrumental using the category of social space. The accent is made on application of space in the context of urban sociology. All the material is systematized according to division into three aspects of looking at social space: 1. the space of social actors's interactions; 2. the structure of status positions; 3. the connection of geographic space and social meanings that are attached to it.
An attempt of research of a ratio of the theory and practice in François Guizot scientific and public work is undertaken in this article. Guizot is the central figure of the French liberalism of the first half of the XIX century. The theory and practice of this thinker synthesized liberalism and conservatism.
This paper represents a synthesis of few working papers of the author, published in various mostly foreign publications. In the paper the author examines social consequences and social prerequisites for specific role that Russian state and Russian audiences are playing in the media. In our opinion the situation in Russian media cannot to be perceived outside the context of social structure of the Russian society and the role of the state in this society.
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.