Killings in Context: an Analysis of the News Framing of Femicide

While attacks against members of the LGBT community are increasingly covered as hate crimes and are widely viewed as a form of repression, attacks on women are almost never covered as violations of human rights. We propose that until violence against women is recognized as a form of repression and a threat to the physical security of women, we cannot expect much to be done to prevent it. We posit that policies aimed at preventing violence against women are unlikely to come about unless this abstract concept is connected, through a connection frame, to concrete crimes against women. We conducted a framing analysis of news coverage of all confirmed femicides in Massachusetts in 2013 and find that while journalists have the potential to draw these connection frames, they seldom put these killings in the context of violations of women’s rights.     

Inequality,marketisation and the left: Schools policy in England and Sweden

It is argued in this article that the marketisation of schools policy has a tendency to produce twin effects: an increase in educational inequality, and an increase in general satisfaction with the schooling system. However, the effect on educational inequality is very much stronger where prevailing societal inequality is higher. The result is that cross‐party political agreement on the desirability of such reforms is much more likely where societal inequality is lower (as the inequality effects are also lower). Counterintuitively, then, countries that are more egalitarian – and so typically thought of as being more left‐wing – will have a higher likelihood of adopting marketisation than more unequal countries. Evidence is drawn from a paired comparison of English and Swedish schools policies from the 1980s to the present. Both the policy history and elite interviews lend considerable support for the theory in terms of both outcomes and mechanisms.     

Inequality,Diversity and Social Trust in Norwegian Communities

This article examines community effects on social trust in Norwegian communities. The large research literature on social trust agrees that community effects are important, but disagree about which aspects of communities influence social trust. The main current disagreement concerns the relative importance of ethnic diversity and socio-economic factors, such as income inequality within communities and differences in socio-economic standing between communities. We test the competing propositions on a Norwegian dataset consisting of 99 communities and 6,166 survey respondents within those communities arguing that it is particularly interesting to look at the relationship between diversity and social trust in the setting of a wealthy universalist welfare state. It is to our knowledge the first dataset that allows a hierarchical analysis of the determinants of social trust in the Norwegian context. The results of our models show that economic inequality, within and between communities, has a direct negative effect on social trust, but that it is not possible to separate the effects of ethnic diversity and level of unemployment. This study thus lends support to the body of research that first and foremost emphasizes the role of economic inequality in accounts of community differences and social trust.     

Inequality and the Dynamics of Public Opinion: The Self‐Reinforcing Link Between Economic Inequality and Mass Preferences

This article assesses the influence of income inequality on the public's policy mood. Recent work has produced divergent perspectives on the relationship between inequality, public opinion, and government redistribution. One group of scholars suggests that unequal representation of different income groups reproduces inequality as politicians respond to the preferences of the rich. Another group of scholars pays relatively little attention to distributional outcomes but shows that government is generally just as responsive to the poor as to the rich. Utilizing theoretical insights from comparative political economy and time‐series data from 1952 to 2006, supplemented with cross‐sectional analysis where appropriate, we show that economic inequality is, in fact, self‐reinforcing, but that this is fully consistent with the idea that government tends to respond equally to rich and poor in its policy enactments.     

Polarization,Politics and Property Rights: Links Between Inequality and Growth

We argue that social polarization reduces the security ofproperty and contract rights and, through this channel,reduces growth. The first hypothesis is supported by cross-country evidence indicating that polarization in the form ofincome inequality, land inequality, and ethnic tensions isinversely related to a commonly-used index of the security ofcontractual and property rights. When the security of propertyrights is controlled for in cross-country growth regressions,the relationship between inequality and growth diminishesconsiderably. This and other evidence provides support for oursecond hypothesis, that inequality reduces growth in partthrough its effect on the security of property rights.     

Regulatory Contradictions: The Political Determinants of Labor Market Inequality in Korea and Japan

Growing labor market inequality in Korea and Japan is often blamed on increased trade competition with China, the information technology revolution, and aging populations. This study shows that labor market inequality is not simply driven by such structural changes but by the nature of the ways in which new labor market regulations were created and the resulting regulatory contradictions. Although its state-centric strategies designed new labor market regulation favoring marginal workers, the Korean government failed to resolve labor market inequality. This is because the government's new regulatory goal was not backed by sufficient policy resources or adequately coordinated with other policy areas. Conversely, Japanese authorities prioritized the employment stability of regular workers on the basis of consensus among labor and business groups and the government. However, this narrow goal continues to inhibit progress in closing the gap of labor market inequality.