Skip to content

Attitudes to economic inequality in the UK

Project summary: The project aims to build understanding amongst policy makers and third sector organisations of public attitudes toward inequality in the UK and measures to address it.

Deadline:	25 February 2008 (Full proposals)
JRF Committee:	Public Interest in Poverty Issues Advisory Group
Timescale:	To report by end of 2008
Budget:	Up to maximum £80,000
Key contacts:	Teresa Hanley (PIPI Manager), teresa_hanley@dsl.pipex.org, 020 7263 8841 Marguerite Owen (administrator), marguerite.owen@jrf.org.uk, 01904 615903

Supporting documents:

• What makes a good proposal?
• Application guidelines

Project summary

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) is funding a programme which focuses on understanding of, and equipping better those seeking to build support for UK poverty eradication. We do this through analysis of attitudes to poverty and facilitating dialogue on their implications for communication and change. This project aims to delve more deeply to build understanding of public attitudes to economic inequality. In particular, it will consider the values that lie behind expressed attitudes, influences upon attitudes and public attitudes towards what, if anything should be done to address current trends in economic inequality.

The primary audience for outputs will be policy officers, advisers and communicators of third sector organisations and of all main political parties across the UK.

Background / context

Public interest in poverty issues – relevance of attitudes to inequality

JRF is supporting a programme which aims to equip better those building support for poverty eradication in the UK. This seeks to build understanding of attitudes to poverty and their implications for communication and change amongst communicators and decision-makers. To eradicate poverty means at least engaging with issues of economic inequality and many would argue reducing it. Public attitudes are important in terms of influencing and enabling government action.

Public debate on inequality

In recent JRF seminars on communication of poverty there have been calls for a public debate, framed more broadly beyond poverty to discuss wealth and inequality in the UK. The Get Heard project, which highlighted the experiences and views of people on low incomes, said "we can't address poverty until we address the gap between the rich and the poor". It is not known if this is a view shared more broadly.

Public discussion on inequality has tended to focus on the extremes of "the super rich" or those coping with extreme poverty. Current debate, many feel is dominated by short-term political arguments and exchanges of statistics. It is felt to be stale, unproductive, ill-informed and limited in its range of participants. The impact of current trends such as globalisation and migration, a focus in much of the media on wealth and celebrity along with the weakening of some group identities and institutions such as the unions has changed the nature of the debate on UK inequality. There have been some efforts to broaden the debate eg to raise debate on a maximum wage. In general, there is a sense that the UK lacks the means (forum and language) for an informed debate on current inequality which would truly involve a broad spectrum of the public.

Inequality in the UK

The statistics on inequality in the UK present a somewhat confusing picture. Many measures indicate that economic inequality in the UK is rising. For instance, the Gini co-efficient is statistically significantly higher than levels inherited by the Labour government. On the other hand, measures of inequality which do not take into account the incomes of those at the highest and lowest ends of income distribution, such as the 90:10 measure, show inequality to have reduced. However, already low levels of social mobility in Britain have not improved in more than thirty years. There are also signs of increasing segregation between income groups in the UK.

Evidence suggests that inequality has detrimental consequences for society in terms of crime, health and education outcomes. Across rich countries high levels of inequality correlate with high levels of poverty. Inequality is higher in the UK than any other comparably wealthy country other than the US.

Public attitudes

In 2007 JRF published a review of available literature on attitudes to economic inequality in the UK. This highlighted the consistency of public dissatisfaction with UK economic inequality even when people under-estimated the actual gap. In work for the Fabian Society 85% of those interviewed said in Britain the gap between the rich and the poor should be much smaller ('The Equality Challenge' by Tom Hampson and Rachael Jolley). Regardless of confusing statistics, dissatisfaction with economic inequality is high and this seems to be consistent across income categories.

Attitudes to address inequality in the UK are more mixed. Some work indicates an appetite to address some inequalities . But other research indicates acquiescence to the current situation as people compare themselves more with their neighbours and peers than those in other socio-economic groups . BSA statistics indicate that support for measures to address inequality decreases once redistribution is explicitly referred to. Public responses to measures to address inequality appear to be linked to views of fairness but also government competence. People say they would pay more tax if it improved health, education services, reduced child poverty BUT do not believe it will. This finding seems to be across income levels. It is not really known if scepticism of the government will or ability is the real or sole factor behind this attitude.

Getting behind the statistics

Public attitudes to economic inequality are complex for a number of reasons. These includes that:

• Economic inequality is linked with other inequalities – such as education and health both in terms of opportunities open to people of different incomes as well as outcomes. Public attitudes to inequality are also not neatly compartmentalised between economic and other inequalities.
• Income inequality and wealth inequality are linked but not synonymous. Public attitudes to these are linked but at times appear contradictory.
• Public attitudes are fluid and can appear ambiguous.

The successful proposal is expected to engage with these connections and complexities in so far as the research will illuminate public attitudes to economic inequality.

The British Statistics Association produces figures each year which provide quantitative data on UK attitudes. However, their utility is limited due to the difficulty in interpreting their meaning. For instance, it is not known what people mean when they talk about high incomes – eg do they include wealth and assets or only salary and other direct income sources?

There have been some relatively small scale studies looking at aspects of public attitudes and influences on these eg reference groups. However, these have not been comprehensive enough or on a scale large enough to drawn firm conclusions.

The project

This project aims to build understanding of attitudes to economic inequality both to be better able to interpret existing data but mainly to inform future communication and policy implementation.

This research will link with work JRF will carry out to consider the implications of attitudes for:

1. those involved in communicating poverty and promoting debate on poverty and inequality in the UK.
2. those seeking to introduce and implement policies which will bring about change ie eradicate poverty and address inequality.

Aim

To understand in more depth public attitudes to economic inequality.

In particular the research should look at:

• What do people mean when they say inequality is too high including:
1. How do understandings and experiences of wealth and income affect responses?
2. What do people understand high and low incomes to be?
3. How are views on economic inequality linked to other related concepts?
• What are the drivers of attitudes including consideration of values, reference groups, attitudes to wealth; wider political discourse, views on fairness and social justice.
• What do people think should be done about current trends in economic inequality in the short term and long term? This may include consideration of doing nothing and also views of different measures to address poverty, both those currently being implemented and more 'blue skies ' thinking.

Methodology

1. A literature review has already been completed so review of documentation for this project is expected to be minimal.
2. The focus of the project is anticipated to be qualitative work which will include:
   • "hard to reach groups" ie high and low earners (top 10% and bottom 10%)
   • consideration of diversity issues because certain groups are disproportionately represented in lower income groups eg women, migrants, some BME groups.
   The successful proposal will adopt a methodology which is both in depth but on a scale sufficient to produce robust findings which can be the basis for debate about their implications for policy and communication.
3. The methodology should ensure the findings and recommendations are relevant across the UK so take account of regional and local decision making bodies as well as any regional differences in attitudes.
4. The methodology should consider that the research is part of a process to inform debate and action on inequality. The proposed methodology should build in opportunities for liaison and consultation with key target audiences eg policy advisers to political parties across the UK, communications staff of third sector organisations, academics and other commentators.

Expected outputs

The expected outputs are a 15,000 word report, detailing the methods, results and policy and practice implications, and a 2,000 word summary. However, we are open to other ideas about effective outputs beyond or instead of these usual ones. If more than one project is funded from this call, then contributions to joint publication(s) may be required.

Previous outputs

Other recent work funded by the JRF that may be of relevance to this call for proposals includes:

1. Understanding attitudes to poverty in the UK: getting the public’s attention
   Sarah Castell, Julian Thompson (2007)
2. Attitudes to poverty: Findings from the British Social Attitudes survey
   Alison Park, Miranda Phillips and Chloe Robinson (2007)
3. Public attitudes to economic inequality
   Michael Orton and Karen Rowlingson (2007)

Submitting a Proposal

It is essential that you read the How to Apply for funding section of our website before submitting your proposal, together with the Application guidelines containing the necessary forms for completing your application. There are also details available on what makes a good proposal and projects the Foundation does not support, which proposers should read, as well as some other useful information.

Three unbound, hard copies of all documents are required. Please also email a Word version of the complete proposal, summary and budget forms to Marguerite Owen by the deadline below.

Proposals should be submitted to:

Marguerite Owen
Joseph Rowntree Foundation
The Homestead, 40 Water End
YORK YO30 6WP

Timetable

The deadline for receipt of email and hard copies of full proposals is 2.00 pm on Monday 25th February 2008.

Unfortunately, late submissions cannot be accepted. Following review by JRF staff and advisers, proposals that meet the required standards will be submitted to the Public Interest in Poverty Issues Advisory Group in March 2008 for their consideration.

Budget

The maximum budget for this call overall is £80,000 (including VAT and all other expenses).

How we make funding decisions (full proposals)

The following criteria will be used in coming to a decision on full proposals:

• How far the work will offer new insights or developments.
• The soundness and appropriateness of how the work will be done (i.e. design, methods and analysis).
• Whether partnerships with relevant other organisations are in place, where these are important.
• The ability of the proposers to carry out the work and complete on time.
• An understanding of the policy and practice dimensions.

Other issues that will be considered include: whether the proposal pays attention to diversity where appropriate (i.e. attending to gender, ethnicity, class, disability etc.) and whether it is written in accessible, lay language. A full yet accessible explanation of the proposed methods to be used is essential, as is full consideration of the ethical implications of the work and the implications for policy and practice across different nations of the UK.

Key contacts

For queries about the research, including the methods, please contact:

Teresa Hanley, PIPI Manager
020 7263 8841
teresa_hanley@dsl.pipex.com

For queries about the application process, deadlines etc., please contact:

Marguerite Owen, Administrator
01904 615903
marguerite.owen@jrf.org.uk

Back to top ^^