Equity and Social Equilibrium
Abstract
Management concepts on needs and motivation have assisted organisations in maintaining better industrial relations. Legislative and administrative mechanisms enforcing equitable relations have contributed towards maintaining organisational equilibrium and industrial harmony. Extending such concepts to the national arena may assist in reducing social tensions and maintaining social equilibrium. Social peace, especially in culturally diverse societies, is dependent on factors that include balanced satisfaction of diverse social aspirations, community consultations in social decision-making, motivation of individual and group behaviour in achieving modest social goals and ensuring equality of opportunity for diverse social groups. When society fails enforcing equitable frameworks, it unleashes social currents that tend to propel the entire society into imbalance. Australia had developed mechanisms to maintaining social harmony while Sri Lanka has been moving towards aggravating social conflict, mainly due to the absence or lack of access to equity mechanisms. However, the last decade has witnessed increasing inequity in Australia.
CV thumb-sketch
Lionel Bopage, BSc(Eng), DipMS (UK), MBA(Vid), MPA(UC), AIMM, MIEAust, C.Eng.; Management Consultant, Professional Engineer and formerly General Secretary of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and Member, District Development Council Galle, Sri Lanka
--------------------------
Equity and Social Equilibrium
by
Lionel Bopage, BSc(Eng), DipMS (UK), MBA(Vid), MPA(UC), AIMM, MIEAust, C.Eng
Introduction
Social equilibrium keeps social peace and is dependent on many factors. Management theories explain what organizations need to do to maintain organisational equilibrium. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs[1] provides a framework for examining individual motivation. The ‘need to achieve’[2] provides a powerful motivating force that appears to derive from individuals’ social conditioning and positive and negative factors[3] affect such motivation.
Development of frameworks of equitable relations and mechanisms to enforce them has contributed to maintaining industrial relations equilibrium within organisations. This model when extended to a national arena may assist in reducing social tension and maintaining social equilibrium. Many factors affect the dynamics that keep society in equilibrium. Social equity is one such factor. This paper limits its discussion to equity. Equity aspects of social equilibrium, in this context, deal with needs satisfaction and motivation of entire social layers.
When societal inequities grow, social currents that tend to propel the entire society into imbalance are unleashed, moving towards a new state of social equilibrium. This process may become peaceful or violent depending on the maturity and nature of interaction of the social currents unleashed. Comparing socio-political developments in the last half-century in Australia and Sri Lanka, this paper looks at the dynamic role social equity plays in preserving social equilibrium in the two countries.
Egalitarianism, equity and peace
The socio-political concept of egalitarianism favours a greater degree of equality of income and wealth across people than currently exists, but does not necessarily demand that living standards of people be made the same or that they need to be treated the same in every respect. An egalitarian might be “one who maintains that people ought to be treated as equals--as possessing equal fundamental worth and dignity and as equally morally considerable”[4].
The general idea of Equal Opportunity (EO) is that the political economy of a society must provide a "level playing field," and individuals must bear the results of their own choices. EO requires providing for social indemnification against negative consequences due to circumstances beyond one’s control. An EO policy needs to equalize outcomes when they are consequences of causes beyond a person's control and differentiate outcomes when they are the consequences of autonomous choice. This means that no one will be worse off than others because of factors beyond one’s control.
In a society based on generational inheritance of wealth, inheritance by birth determines individual competitive prospects. Access to intellectual and cultural development that confer skills for employment will be limited to those who are affluent by birth or by accident, unless there is societal intervention in alleviating the unfortunate circumstances beyond their control. This provides the basis for state intervention in education, health and family services to ensure public funds are used for the benefit of all citizens. Such a system provides stability and helps maintaining social equilibrium.
The model of social peace discussed here is based on the following premises. As long as mankind exists social causes for conflict will exist. Such conflicts, if managed appropriately, could be maintained within boundaries of tolerance. When conflicts continue to develop, at a certain point, it will exceed those boundaries destabilising the system and disturbing the equilibrium. Such system destabilisation and disturbance could lead to a new equilibrium that one may or may not prefer. Therefore, to keep social peace, it is politically significant to develop and maintain effective mechanisms that could contain social conflicts within boundaries of tolerance.
Australia
Australia has witnessed social peace over the past 50 years and enjoyed minimum social tensions. Australian egalitarianism, according to Argy, was based on guaranteed full-time employment; protected wages and working conditions; unconditional needs-based safety net; progressive tax system; public health, education and housing, balanced distribution of economic opportunities and participative decision making. Yet, this “egalitarianism” has not adequately looked at the disadvantages of non-white and indigenous Australians and the discrimination against women.
The Australian society at the end of 1980s was much different from that existed before the Second World War. Abolition of the White Australia policy and introduction of multiculturalism with bi-partisan support in the early 1970s were very significant positive steps towards strengthening the social harmony. Australia gradually became a more tolerant and harmonious society appreciating and respecting cultural diversity. However, this social experiment could not have succeeded without reducing major social inequalities, in which access and equity frameworks played a significant role.
Since 1990s, Australia has downgraded its access and equity frameworks. Since the launch of the Fitzgerald Report[5], neo-conservative ideology has gathered significant strength. Liberal Party (LP) consciously shifted the debate on immigration and multiculturalism to a debate on the nature of the Australian society. Expressing concerns that “aspects of multiculturalism could lead to fragmentation” the LP and its associates asserted the need for “once again a ‘One Australia’ approach to the cultural basis” of Australia.[6] In late 1990s, the One Nation Party took over this social agenda emphasising the “need for a change in the mix of migrants”[7].
Growing inequalities have been noticed in all spheres on which Australian egalitarianism was based on.. Budget proposals of 2003, if passed, will gradually erode the fundamental right of disadvantaged children to higher education. Access and equity enforcement mechanisms have been downgraded. Tax system is tilted towards benefiting the affluent. New employment opportunities are becoming increasingly part-time and casual, generating more uncertainty and insecurity. Top executives enjoy a disproportionate share of the economic gains compared with the employees and shareholders. The Australian society is still relatively stable, but signs of growing social tension are visible. This tendency, if continued, will lead to the growth of social forces that will tend to destabilise it.
Sri Lanka
Since independence in 1948, Sri Lanka has witnessed significant social conflicts. The introduction of free-market economy in 1977, based on neo-conservative agenda, accompanied further curtailment of democratic rights. Large-scale privatisation of state plantations and enterprises was achieved by sales at marginal prices[8]. The benefits of economic prosperity in the 1980s were concentrating only in the hands of a few.
By the end of 2000, the private sector component of industry had grown to 94% while the state sector diminished to 6%. Cost of Living Index went up from 2829.2 in April 2001 to 2912.7 by June 2001. During the same period the rate of inflation went up from 10.3% to 11.5%. In the year 2000 alone, about 350 businesses were closed down. The IMF loans kept up foreign exchange reserve levels and in turn the government agreed to re-structure and privatise many public sector services. The present government has liberalised petroleum importation and distribution, and is in the process of privatising the power generation sector. It has increased the tax burden on the disadvantaged while providing tax concessions to the affluent.
Recent Central Bank reports indicate drastic reductions in agricultural production. Nearly 80 per cent of the peasants have become recipients of the Poverty Alleviation Program. The working people are subject to growing unemployment, social alienation, deprivation and rapidly declining living standards. On the positive side, free trade has increased the participation of rural women in wage-labour. However, this has not improved their socio-economic status but relegated them to low-paid employment, in an environment of sexual harassment and violence.
National aspirations of Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims, unrealised since 1948, had given rise to the growth of extreme forms of nationalism. Increasing discriminatory practices[9] led the progression of Tamil struggle through the phases of demands for addressing grievances, equality, federalism and separation.
In the face of continued social, economic and political oppression, the social equilibrium became increasingly destabilized leading to conflicts in the south and the north of Sri Lanka. High costs of the war and the international pressure have precipitated the current truce and a few rounds of peace talks between the government and the LTTE. However, the peace process is vulnerable and fragile, due to a number of factors, such as violations of the memorandum signed between them, the reality of the inability to fully implement decisions taken, mutual distrust, lack of bipartisanship, political opportunism and negative influence of external forces.
There had been many government policies and programs to ‘assist’ the disadvantaged. However, the experience of the past 50 years indicates that such policies and programs have not assisted much in achieving a fairer society. Usually these programs have offered more opportunities and benefits to large business ventures. The gap between the rich and the poor has widened and a “needs-based” safety net does not exist. Discrimination based on caste, clan and political allegiances still persist. Community consultation in social decision-making is totally absent.
Since 1990s, governments have shown signs of appreciating the need to recognise the cultural diversity in Sri Lanka. Attempts to devolve power for meeting the aspirations of the diversity and to develop equity frameworks are being strongly opposed by opportunistic political currents. After decades of conflict relative calmness appear to prevail but with the underlying social tensions, the social fabric is still held at the edge of war.
Bibliography:
1. Argy, Fred, Where to From here? Australian egalitarianism under threat, Allen & Unwin, South Australia, 2003
2. Rawls, John, 2001, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, edited by Erin Kelly, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2001
3. Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, revised edition, 1999
4. Chen, Shao-hua et al, Is Poverty Increasing in the Developing World? Policy Research Department, the World Bank, 1995
5. Theophanus, Andrew C, Understanding Multiculturalism and Australian Identity, Elikia Books, Melbourne, 1995
6. Daniels, Aubrey C, Bringing Out the Best in People, McGraw-Hill, USA, 1994
7. Rees, W David, The Skills of Management, Routledge, London, 1991
8. Sweeney, Neil R, The Art of Managing Managers, Addison-Wesley, USA, 1981
[1] Human behaviour is centred on a series of needs arranged in a hierarchy, argued Maslow. When needs at one level are satisfied, attempts to satisfy needs at the next level arise.
[2] McClelland suggests that an individual’s wish to self-actualise may depend on his/her ‘need to achieve’.
[3] Herzberg’s research and modern psychological theories of motivation.
[4] http://setis.library.usyd.edu.au/stanford/entries/egalitarianism/
[5] This report on immigration and multiculturalism was delivered in June 1988 caused a serious blow to multiculturalism.
[6] John Howard, press interview on 16 May 1988, Parliament House, Canberra
[7] John Howard, Leader of Opposition’s address on 23 June 1988, National Press Club, Canberra
[8] By 1998 about eighty state industries and service enterprises had been privatised for an income of Rs 49,213.5m to the state.
[9] Practices such as disenfranchisement of Indian Tamil workers, language issues of 1950s and associated repressive measures against Tamils, unilateral abolition of Bandaranaike – Chelvanayagam and Dudley – Chelvanayagam pacts, standardisation of university entrance, colonisation schemes, provision of special status in the constitutions, enactment of new repressive legislation.
No comments:
Post a Comment