Why we are troubled by elitist inequality review | Letters
We welcome the idea of a major review of inequality (Britain 'risks heading to US levels of inequality', 14 May). With Brexit looming and recent analyses linking income inequality to voting for rightwing populists, mass shootings, mental ill health, status consumerism and domestic violence, this is indeed a critical issue for our times.
However, there is widespread concern about the composition of this review's "expert panel", which has a majority of white economists. Although the panel includes an expert on health inequalities, none of the world's leading experts on the health and psychosocial effects of income inequality itself are included, nor is there expertise in the spatial aspects of inequality. And there is a conspicuous absence of world-leading economists for whom income inequality is their primary focus - no Piketty, no Stiglitz, no Galbraith, no Frank, no Fitoussi, no Palma, no Chang, no Milanovic. Sir Angus Deaton, leading the review, stated in the journal Science in 2014 that he "get[s] angry" about the theory that inequality has psychological and social effects on health - perhaps he has changed his mind now that his own research has uncovered rising deaths from addiction and suicide in the US, but there are many researchers with much greater depth in this area. Even more troubling, there is no ethnic minority representation on the "expert panel", no people with lived experience of inequality, no representatives of charities, trade unions or other NGOs. The number of disciplines represented is also small, although the impact of inequality goes far beyond economics.
Continue reading...