Portfolio Questions
Week 2
1. What is intersectionality? What are some of the key debates around this concept? Draw on the reading by Bassel in your response.
Intersectionality is the simultaneous and interacting effects of the system of oppression on the basis of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation and national origin as categories of difference. It demonstrates the interconnected nature of these social categories and contributes to discrimination and disadvantage. Intersectionality is also referred to as particular forms of intersecting oppressions that cannot be reduced to one fundamental type (Collins 2000).
Some of the key debates around this concept relate to the illegitimate and oppressive nature of identity claims, and how it has developed into a source and form of resistance (Erel et al. 2010). The effects of interaction of these social categories have also been made visible, displaying similarities to macro social structures (Weldon 2006). Another key debate regarding the concept of intersectionality relates to the argument that promoting multiple intersections may have also indirectly encouraged competition to obtain recognition and decision making power among groups (Squires 2007).
2. In what ways does Kabeer’s intersectional analysis of development contexts (2010) enhance scholars’ and practitioners’ understanding of social exclusions? Provide two examples from the reading.
Kabeer’s intersectional analysis stresses that the inequalities that lead to social exclusion are deeply entrenched in the historical structures and everyday practices of societies. It is also shown that the effects of this outcome directly impacts those who are socially excluded, and indirectly affects society as a whole.
The first example involves asset inequalities, where socially excluded groups are not allowed to own or purchase land. In India, members of the ‘untouchable’ castes are mostly landless, even until today. This not only shows the continuous and evident presence of discriminatory practices in modern society but also proves that socially excluded groups have not benefited from large-scale expansion and infrastructure projects that have aimed to develop society as a whole.
Another example relates to Kabeer’s analysis on disadvantaged livelihoods. In most cases, members of socially excluded groups have been associated with low paid and demeaning jobs which are considered to be degrading and dirty.
According to Kabeer, a combination of discrimination and lower levels of education often confine socially excluded groups to this sort of exploitative work. The lack of knowledge and access to financial services has also been identified as an obstacle for the poor to obtain credit. This serves as a mechanism for the intergenerational transmission of poverty since the children of bonded labourers often become bonded labourers themselves (Kabeer 2010).
3. What does Shah’s ethnographic study (2015) tell us about the possible consequences of the exclusion of the Adivasi people from development policies and decision-making?
According to Shah (2015), the Adivasi people are one of the poorest people in the world. As a result of being excluded from development policies and decision-making, they have not been provided with access to proper education and healthcare facilities. Therefore a majority of them are illiterate, and many are killed by diseases. These are consequences of the desire of the affluent to enrich themselves at the cost of the Adivasi people. Development policies and plans should aim to improve the lives of everyone, instead, it comes at a high cost to the Adivasi people who often become worse off when mining companies or the government attempts to take advantage of their situation, thus subjecting them to further isolation and discrimination.
Week 3
1. Briefly outline and explain Harris’ critiques of ‘normal science’ and ‘depoliticisation’ in poverty studies.
Harris explains that difficulties in poverty measurement point to the problem regarding a model of knowledge on which poverty analysis is based on. It is a model of ‘normal science’ which strives to develop a predictive theory intended for universal application, based mainly on generalisation. According to Harris, the social sciences have not been nearly as successful as the natural sciences in developing explanatory and predictive theories for universal application. ‘Social scientists set themselves an impossible task in seeking to emulate the natural sciences’ (Flyvberg, 2001). However, the problem lies in the case that humans have the ability to make judgements and think independently, they are context dependent. Flyvberg further states that the kind of theory developed in normal science depends on freedom from context. This demonstrates the distinction between social and natural sciences.
O’Connor (2001) states that the international poverty research industry looks towards scientific knowledge as the key to solving the poverty problem. O’Connor also points out that although early research focused on issues such as unemployment, low wages and disruptions associated with industrial capitalism, current research has distanced itself from such political economy issues. Research foundations and government agencies who provide funding and resources to carry out poverty research have interfered in the process of carrying out ‘policy relevant’,‘scientific’ and ‘ideologically free’ research. The interference of outside parties in this process has lead to poverty being seen as the fault of individuals or the welfare system, rather than the economy in which people constantly face diminishing opportunities.
2. In your view, are the proposals outlined by Harris in sections 5 and 6 sufficient for addressing the issues of depoliticisation and scientism in poverty studies?
In order to recognise the fact that the continuous cycle of poverty is due to the structures of capitalism, Harriss suggests greater attention should be paid to the analysis of social processes, structures and relationships that give rise to poverty. This may be able to create awareness regarding the ability of power and politics to contribute towards to rising of poverty. Recognising that studying poverty is not to be equated with studying the poor also directs our attention towards the structural conditions that tend to blame individuals for the failures of the economy as a whole. Distancing poverty studies from the ‘research industry model’ often funded and influenced by ideologically based agencies and institutes may also provide opportunities to develop ‘policy relevant’ research.
3. What is Hickel’s critique of the Gini coefficient? How does he propose to measure global inequality instead?
According to Hickel, the Gini coefficient is an unreliable measure of global inequality because it only measures relative changes. Although there has undoubtedly been an increase in absolute inequality, the Gini coefficient tends to remain the same. In this case, an increase in the income gap between two individuals would not be captured by the index.
One method to measure global inequality as suggested by Hickel involves measuring the gap between the richest and poorest countries in real income per capita. This metric overstates inequality by focusing on countries at either extreme, but this can be corrected by looking at regional differences. One way to do so involves measuring the gap in real terms, between the GDP per capita of the world’s dominant power (the United States) and that of various regions of the global South.
Week 4
1. According to Singer (1972 [2009]), what are the main justifications of our moral obligations to others?
According to Singer, we consider it obligatory to lessen the suffering of innocent others, even at some cost to ourselves. The examples stated reveal our intuitive belief that we ought to help others in need, at least when we can see them and when we are the only person in a position to save them. According to Singer, the main justifications of our moral obligation to others involve three premises. First, suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad. Second, if it is in your power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything nearly as important, it is wrong not to do so. Finally, by donating to aid agencies, you can prevent suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care, without sacrificing anything nearly as important.
2. What are Wenar’s (2011) key criticisms of “the Singer solution”?
Wenar (2011) sees the difficulty in providing donors with a precise answer regarding the estimates of the costs and benefits of providing aid as one of the key criticisms of “the Singer solution”. He also sees the existence of complexities within political, economic and social contexts which generate significant challenges for the success of aid initiatives. Any effective aid programme requires a long-term commitment, and providing rushed or inadequate efforts may further worsen the situation. Wenar notes that state institutions in poor countries are usually less effective, and providing aid may lead to the worsening of corruption and bribery among officials. When donors bypass the government to directly provide for citizens of a country, it becomes easier for the government to ignore their duties and obligations. This leads to less transparency and accountability in local governments. Wenar also sees the provision of aid making people worse off than they would have been, due to it being able to draw a person away from their self-sustaining livelihood. There is also higher chances of inflation, unemployment and delays to much needed political reforms within a country.
3. Which of the 10 capabilities does Nussbaum (2011) define as architectonic? Discuss briefly how they relate to two of the other eight capabilities.
According to Nussbaum (2011), two of the Central Capabilities appear to play a distinctive architectonic role in a sense that they organise and pervade the others. These two capabilities are ‘affiliation’ and ‘practical reason’. They pervade others in a sense that when the others are present in a form commensurate with human dignity, they are woven into them. For example, if a person is well-nourished (bodily health) but not empowered enough to exercise practical reason and planning with regard to their health, this does not provide an adequate importance to human dignity. Good policy in the area of each of the capabilities is a policy that respects and individual’s practical reason. The capability of ‘practical reason’ to organise all the others refers to the opportunity for an individual to plan his or her own life, and to choose and order the functions corresponding to the various other capabilities.
‘Affiliation’ pervades the other capabilities in a sense that when they are made available in a sense that acknowledges human dignity, affiliation is part of them. For example, making employment options available without considering workplace relationships would not be adequate, nor would forms of healthcare that neglect people’s needs to protect primary zones of intimacy (bodily integrity) by provisions for personal privacy. In the case, ‘affiliation’ organises the capabilities in that deliberation about public policy as a social matter in which relationships of many kinds all play a structuring role.
Week 7
1. What are the forces of convergence and divergence described by Piketty (2014)?
The mechanisms pushing towards convergence, are those pushing towards reduction and compression of inequalities. The main forces for convergence are the diffusion of knowledge and investment in training and skills. Piketty describes the law of demand and supply, as well as the mobility of capital and labor, which is a variant of that law, always tends towards convergence as well, but the influence of this economic law is less powerful than the diffusion of knowledge and skill and is frequently ambiguous or contradictory in its implications.
Forces of divergence can exist in a world where there is adequate investment in skills and where all the conditions of market efficiency appear to be satisfied. The forces of divergence can enable top earners to quickly separate themselves from the rest by a wide margin. A set of forces of divergence is also associated with the process of accumulation and concentration of wealth when growth is weak and return on capital is high. This process is generally more destabilising and represents a threat to an equal distribution of wealth in the long run.
2. Dani Rodrik describes how, in the natural sciences, models develop ‘vertically’. In contrast, economic models develop ‘horizontally’. What does he mean by this?
According to Rodrik, models related to natural sciences develop newer models which provide a better representation of reality, to replace older models. Thus these models mainly develop vertically with older models being deemed as irrelevant or invalid in light of current developments in the field of science. However, economic models do not advance similarly to models related to the natural sciences. Economists tend to expand and develop existing models. These different models which develop horizontally aim to provide insight to what might happen in different situations, thus creating a mechanism capable of understanding different outcomes of a situation when different models are used contextually.
3. Do you agree with Rodrik’s thesis that economic models, as ‘simplified abstractions’ of reality, are useful for explaining empirical phenomena? Why or why not?
Economic models which are ‘simplified abstractions’ of reality provide simplified explanations which can be used to explain empirical phenomena. These models focus on relevant aspects of a phenomenon, while models that try to provide thorough and detailed explanations often end up becoming irrelevant. Economic models also require flexibility, due to the fact that explanations for certain occurrences may differ because when different approaches are used during the process of gathering and interpreting data. Economics isn’t a science that aims to achieve and understanding that brings us closer to a representation of reality. Instead, it requires models that allow us to simplify and abstract data in a useful way to get ahead. Criticism regarding the lack of complexity if these models due to arguments that the world is ‘complicated’ simply misses the purpose of economic models.
Week 8
1. According to Zelizer (2012), in what sense are market transactions ‘relational’?
Economic action of individuals, as well as larger economic patterns, are very importantly affected by networks of social relationships (Granovetter, 1998). For the economic action of individuals, the embeddedness of individuals in networks of social relationships is highly significant. The four elements in all economic activities include distinctive personal ties, economic transactions, media and negotiated meanings. Variable connections among such elements constitute what we call relational packages. Thus, the relationship between any elements may fit into categories each with its own meanings, economic transactions, and media for determining who pays, how, when, for what, how much, how often, for how long and which currency.
2. What are the aims of the fair trade movement, as described by Sheller (2013), Wilson (2011) and Leissle (2012)? How does it seek to intervene in global markets?
According to Wilson (2011), Fairtrade claims to give producers ‘fair prices for their produce, better terms of trade, access to markets and credit’. They encourage organic production and offer support and emergency assistance to growers. Anthropologist, Daniel Miller sees the Fair-trade movement being embraced to a certain extent within some academic circles. He argues that ‘What is required is a middle range morality, which reinscribes on the surface of commodities their consequences for producers often from the developing world, the first move has to be a transfer of profits from First World consumers to Third World producers as increased prices for raw materials’ (Miller, 1995).
3. In ‘Skinning the Banana Trade, Sheller (2013) argues that the ‘contemporary discourse of ‘free trade’ must be examined in the light of the history of the Caribbean’s relation to European and American consumers’. Do you agree? Explain your answer.
Yes, because the importance of bananas in Caribbean countries should be understood as part of Britain’s colonial and post-colonial history in this region. Farmers in this region have come to depend on bananas as a major source of their income due to the effect colonisation has had on the local agricultural economy. Miller (1995) states that ‘the link between first world taste and third world sufferings are understood by the producing nations and it has become evident that their densities become in effect, a secondary effect of shifts in first-world consumption patterns’.
Week 9
1. What are the reasons given in Lodge and Wegrich (2012) for the failure of regulation?
Lodge and Wegrich (2012) state four main reasons for the failure of regulation. First, regulation has been captured by those interests that were supposed to be regulated. Relationships between the regulator and regulatees have become too close, where regulators regularly end up in lucrative positions in regulated firms. There is also the failure of politicians to control regulators, with the intention to avoid upsetting powerful industry interests. To safeguard their jobs, regulators rely on competition instead of regulation to deal oath regulatory problems. Therefore, captured regulation distorts true market forces and results in undesirable economic outcomes.
Next, Lodge and Wegrich sees regulation as always having unintended consequences, where attempts to impose further regulations may lead to increased likelihoods of failure as well as even less regulated and riskier niche markets. Regulators are unable to predict future events, and therefore they cannot be fully prepared to face any kind of outcome. This can lead to a lag behind financial markets. In addition, control regimes who are opposed to the entire system of regulation can learn to ‘play the system’ and seek to redirect regulatory efforts.
The failure of regulation is caused by the poor institutional design of regulatory institutions, which contributes towards more opportunities for things to go wrong. In the process of setting up these institutions, politicians primary motives revolve around making sure that other people are blamed for failures in the system, due to them being unable to change the overall system as time goes by.
Another reason points towards the fact that regulation is driven by an ideology that assumes that regulatees are interested in and capable of monitoring their own behaviour. Lodge and Wegrich state that regulators are too fragmented and do not speak the same language, therefore, there is a need for a new politics of regulatory ideas that emphasise the importance of addressing systemic makes failures rather than one that is reluctant to intervene forcefully.
2. Explain what Lodge and Wegrich mean by: ‘regulation is about competing values’ (2012:25).
Economic market failure arguments should not enjoy superiority over other types of arguments. Regulation should be understood as an inherently contested field of practice in which the right place for regulatory analysis is, first, to understand the plurality of competing options and, second, to understand the prerequisites for one alternative to be able to offer a more persuasive and acceptable option than another (Lodge and Wegrich, 2012).
3. How does the ‘epistemic argument’ for the Harm Principle (Sunstein 2014:7) justify individual free choice? Do you think paternalistic interventions are justifiable? Why or why not?
The epistemic argument for the Harm Principle justifies individual free choice by stating that individuals usually make better choices than those who choose for them. The argument emphasises that free markets provide significant protection against dangerous choices. For example, competition can prevent business from trying to exploit our chances of making mistakes. Many companies also offer services to help people counteract self-control problems. The free market creates strong incentives for companies to respond to these and other problems. Furthermore, new technology creates responses that are increasingly useful, frequent, inventive and personalised. The argument states that people display ‘‘ecological rationality’’, where we tend to choose well in environments for which our rules of thumb, or heuristics, are well suited. For this reason, our choices tend to be right for ourselves, therefore further justifying individual free choice.
I think paternalistic choices are justifiable due to individual choices being affected by choice architecture, meaning the background against which choices are made. Sunstein (2014) states that such architecture can be pervasive and inevitable, and it is able to influence our outcomes. Due to choice architecture being able to inevitably influence and shape our choices, I believe paternalistic interventions can be helpful towards preventing harmful and self-destructive decisions.
Week 10
1. How do Erin and Harris (2003) justify their defence of a market in human organs? How does their argument differ from that of Janet Radcliffe-Richards (2008)?
Erin and Harris (2003) justify their defence by stating that the market should be ethically supportable and have safeguards built into it to avoid exploitation, which can be successfully implemented by establishing a single purchaser system within a confined marketplace. In 1998, the international Forum for Transplant Ethics concluded that trade in organs should be regulated instead of being banned. A market in donor organs should be achieved ethically, where dangers are minimised. Any commercial donor scheme should have additional safeguards built into it to meet legitimate ethical and regulatory concerns, in order to protect the vulnerable. By having only one purchaser (for example The National Health Service) there would be more direct sales or purchases, which enables the prevention of exploitation and abuse. Organs would be able to be bought and distributed fairly according to set guidelines and priorities.
2. Why does Satz (2010: 200) argue that, ‘the existence of kidney markets might make some poor people worse off than they would otherwise be’?
According to Satz (2010), the existence of kidney markets has affected the nature of choices available to poor people. Satz considers the situation where the practice of kidney selling is widespread, kidneys are viewed as potential collateral and moneylenders acquire incentives to seek out additional borrowers as well as to change the terms of loans. Anthropologist Lawrence Cohen’s finding suggests that if kidney selling becomes widespread, a poor person who did not want to sell her kidney might find it harder to obtain a loan. The credit market allocates loans to people who can provide better collateral. Therefore the very existence of the kidney market can lead to an increase in the amount of collateral, and those without spare kidneys or those unwilling to sell them will be at a disadvantage when trying to obtain a loan. These people are made worse off by the kidney market due to not being able to find reasons loan rates without mortgaging their organs.
3. Do you agree with Dickenson (2008: 156) that it is ‘hopelessly inadequate… to simply view the body as an individual’s private capital’? Give reasons for your answer, drawing on Dickenson and any of the other week 10 readings.
Yes. According to Dickenson (2008), capital is money used to breed more money. However, selling organs out of desperation breeds further poverty. Organ trading is not only confined to kidneys but also includes hearts, lungs and livers, which we are unable to live without. Therefore, individuals who are forced to sell their organs due to excessive debts or their status as prisoners (in the case of prisoners in China) face severe risks such as worsened health or the loss of their lives. The uncertainty in the lives of these unfortunate individuals is mainly due to the absence of laws and regulations to protect them. Every individual should be entitled to live a dignified life, and have the choice of making decisions regarding their bodies themselves. However, this can only be achieved by the presence of stricter regulations and penalties regarding the out of control activities relating to the sale of human organs.
Reflection
1. In what ways has your work this term affected your ability to work collaboratively with others to achieve an outcome that is greater than a sum of its parts?
3. What aspects of your work this term were most significant to you and/or to your intellectual development? Why?
4. How has your work this term influenced your thinking about intersectionality in social scientific analysis (e.g. intersections of gender, class, ethnicity, dis/ability, age, geography, etc.)?
There were several aspects of my work this term that was significant towards my intellectual development. I was provided with the opportunity to study issues which I would not have encountered within the field of my undergraduate degree. Due to my course being fairly quantitative, I had not spent much time or effort to understand or learn about social problems. Therefore, through this course, I was able to gain a deeper understanding of issues related to poverty and policy making which helped me gain a clearer understanding of the importance of addressing these issues. I was also able to listen to the opinions and arguments of several experts in their fields regarding these social issues. Listening to them present their research and theories, as well as being able to witness the contribution that the LSE has had towards the development of such meaningful issues has instilled in me a desire to contribute towards efforts to further improve society.
This experience has also allowed me to understand the importance of finding innovative and effective solutions to the problems that we face today, especially for those who are not in a position to defend themselves against injustice and inequality. Throughout class discussions, I was able to listen to the opinions and suggestions of my classmates and class teacher regarding the material covered in the lectures. This experience gave me a chance to discuss and evaluate various ideas, as well as share our own individual experiences with everyone. I believe that by gaining a deeper understanding of issues such as poverty and economic inequality, I am in a better position to make a difference in my chosen field.
Discussions and readings related to intersectionality in social scientific analysis have provided me with the opportunity to look at everyday problems from different points of view. By approaching these problems from a different perspective, I have learnt to ask different questions in order to develop my understanding of the issues discussed. When dealing with a very specific problem, I have learnt to look at the bigger picture, which has helped me develop effective and relevant solutions. My work this term has also provided me with the opportunity to develop my critical thinking skills to solve complex problems. Understanding the links between different readings while evaluating the arguments provided has enabled me to approach the subject of intersectionality with an open mind and understand alternative systems of thought.
My work this term has provided me with numerous opportunities to learn to develop and form objective arguments. I have learnt that arguments based on emotions and preferences are insufficient to support any conclusion. Therefore, being able to justify an argument with sufficient empirical evidence and academic theories will allow me to develop a balanced argument and take a clear stance regarding any issue.
While working in groups to prepare for the group presentation, I have learnt about the importance of recognising and understanding the thoughts and opinions of others. By demonstrating appreciation towards the contribution of others towards the group, there was a sense of commitment and trust within the group. This enabled us to effectively capitalise on the strengths of each member and share knowledge and expertise. I have also become aware of the importance of defining individual roles of members while working as a team, where all members should share equal responsibility and actively contribute throughout the duration of working together. My work this term has enabled me to learn how to balance my individual goals, as well as the goals of my team when working with others. There were situations where I was required to display a willingness to compromise in order to solve disputes. I believe that this taught me to place the goals of my team ahead of my own in order for the team to move forward.
In conclusion, I believe that this course has been extremely beneficial towards my own development. I have gained many invaluable skills, as well as being able to improve my current capabilities. I have also developed a better understanding of issues related to social inequality and I have become more aware of its effects towards society.