Perceptions of inequality: perspectives of national policy makers Figure 6.10. Perceived relevance of selected policy measures to address inequality of opportunities SUPPORT TERCILES
Infrastructure development in rural areas
Infrastructure development in urban areas
70% Political representation of disadvantaged
87%
Greater access to economic services
Greater access to education
76%
84%
69%
Reduce unemployment Greater access to critical public services
Affirmative action
70%
68%
84%
81% 75%
78% Average Support
81%
88%
Somewhat more surprising results emerge in relation to policy measures specifically addressing horizontal inequalities. In fact, the data show that affirmative action policies and measures to strengthen the political representation of disadvantaged groups receive a level of support that is significantly lower than the average for the whole set of policies (70 and 69 percent, respectively), although still fairly high in absolute terms. With an average score of 3.89, strengthening the political representation of disadvantaged groups is the only one in the entire set of policy options being ranked significantly below the ‘necessary’ threshold (i.e., 4 points on a scale from 1 to 5). Interestingly, strengthening the political representation of disadvantaged groups is also the policy measure with the highest relative deviation (30 percent, 6 points above average).
6.5. Political space for action to reduce inequality Even when many people regard it as potentially useful, a policy measure may not always be politically feasible. This section examines policy makers’ views about the political space that is available for inequality reduction in their countries as well as their perceptions about the role of key actors operating in the inequality reduction policy arena.
214 Humanity Divided: Confronting Inequality in Developing Countries