Abstract
Panel of the GHI London
Wenn heutige Leser/innen an „gespaltene Gesellschaften“ denken, kommt die Disparität von Einkommen und Vermögen angesichts der gegenwärtigen öffentlichen Debatten zweifellos als eine der ersten Assoziationen in den Sinn. Doch das boomende Interesse an der ökonomischen Ungleichheit ist selbst ein historisches Phänomen vor allem der letzten drei Jahrzehnte. Genauso selbstverständlich erscheint heute die Verfügbarkeit von einschlägigem Wissen, doch erst seit den 1960er Jahren begannen die meisten Länder der Welt, präzisere Statistiken über die Einkommens- und Vermögensverteilung zu entwickeln. Dabei spielen diese eine zentrale Rolle in der modernen politischen Kultur: Sie beeinflussen Debatten über Verteilungsfragen, gesellschaftliche Selbstbeschreibungen und den Blick auf andere Gesellschaften. Sie suggerieren mathematische Objektivität, doch tatsächlich handelt es sich um politische Konstrukte mit einer Geschichte. Die Historisierung der Einkommens- und Vermögensstatistik galt in der Geschichtswissenschaft lange Zeit als Desiderat. Erst jüngst haben Historiker/innen mit der Erforschung ihrer transnationalen Genealogie begonnen. Das Panel möchte einen Beitrag zur transnationalen Geschichte der Messung ökonomischer Ungleichheit seit 1945 aus einer wissensgeschichtlichen Perspektive leisten. Es ergründet die Produktion, Zirkulation, Deutung und Nutzung von Wissen über die Einkommens- und Vermögensverteilung mit verbundenen Fallstudien aus verschiedenen Weltregionen, politischen Systemen und Wohlfahrtsregimen. Dabei führt es verschiedene Stränge der aktuellen Historiographie zusammen (Statistiken als politische Konstrukte; soziale Ungleichheit und gesellschaftliche Selbstbeschreibungen; Verwissenschaftlichungsprozesse; politische Sprachen). Das Panel geht dabei von der doppelten These aus, dass die globale Wissensgeschichte der ökonomischen Ungleichheit über weite Strecken des 20. Jahrhunderts von Nicht-Wissen und Nicht-Internationalisierung geprägt war. Erst in den 1990er und 2000er Jahren führten verschiedene Prozesse zur Verdichtung einer globalen Debatte über die ökonomische Ungleichheit.
Simone Lässig (Washington)
Moderation
Maria Bach (Paris)
Measuring Difference? The United Nations' Shift to Measuring Inequalities not Averages
This paper examines how the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) redefined their idea of development over the two decades from 1990, no longer presenting it as a matter of economic progress but instead focussing on the problem of poverty and its reduction. This change of definition was very closely associated with changes in the preferred measurement of development, from average income (based on national income accounting) to the proportion of the population holding certain characteristics of poverty (instantiated in various index number formulations). Measurements of development thus became direct measures of difference, not just between nations, but also within nations. This change was designed to create numbers that would be effective in capturing and communicating difference usable for both policy and public purposes. Those numbers also provided, in the public and political domains, a resource for the audit of success in poverty reduction - though the UNDP had few powers to hold governments to account.
Felix Römer (London)
The Politics of Measurement: Inequality Knowledge in Great Britain and the Western World
The history of statistics on income and wealth in Britain after 1945 offers a prime example of the dynamics of power and knowledge. Controversies surrounding statistics from the 1950s/1960s played a significant part in debates about the welfare state during the post-war era, and advances during the 1970s were partially reversed under Thatcher in the 1980s. Domestically, inequality statistics were linked to discourse on social policies and visions of society, while, internationally, British officials attempted to influence efforts to build a global framework for the measurement of inequality. The present knowledge regime began to crystallize during the 1990s, conditioned both by knowledge politics and technological change.
Poornima Paidipaty (Cambridge)
Disparities and Decolonisation: Statistical Thinking and the Measurement of Inequality in Nehruvian India
India’s nationalist leaders had long argued that the nation’s poverty was a direct consequence of colonial greed, ignorance and mismanagement. The success of decolonisation, from the start, was pegged to postcolonial economic development. However, the Nehruvian state lacked fine-grained income data to estimate the size and capacity of the overall economy. They turned to the Indian Statistical Institute, headed by PC Mahalanobis, for help. The applied mathematicians and economists at the Institute developed a novel technique of large-scale economic sampling to fill in gaps in national income data. This paper examines the tensions and uncertainties of these early experiments in sampling and explores their broader political implications for decolonisation.
Christoph Lorke (Münster)
Beyond Egalitarianism: Statistical Knowledge and Social Inequality in the GDR
The Marxist-Leninist theory left no place for social grievances. In fact, they were even considered as ‘alien’ to Socialism. However, social disparities were constantly present in the ‘advanced socialist societies’. Following the economic and political consolidation of the state, a heightened awareness of domestic social problems characterized the GDR during the 1960s. Consequently, scientists turned to the analysis of certain forms of social inequality. The paper analyzes and contextualizes the modalities of societal self-descriptions, which resulted from the conflicts over the interpretative power to define the socially accepted classification, presentation, and performance of social differences.
Tim Schanetzky (Jena)
Commentary
