Subjective Inequality in Chile. Representations of (Un) Fair Social
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales Ecole doctorale de l’EHESS Centre Maurice Halbwachs Doctorat Discipline : Sociologie YANEZ ROJAS RODRIGO Inégalité subjective au Chili. Représentation des différences sociales (in)justes à travers le temps. Thèse dirigée par: Caroline Guibet Lafaye (directrice) et Juan Carlos Castillo (co-directeur). Date de soutenance : le 18 mars 2019. Rapporteurs 1 Emmanuelle BAROZET, Universidad de Chile 2 Sylvie MESURE, Directrice de recherche au CNRS Jury 1 Gilles BATAILLON, Directeur d'études EHESS 2 Olivier GALLAND, Directeur de recherche au CNRS Subjective inequality in Chile. Representations of (un)fair social differences across time Rodrigo Y´a~nezRojas A thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Sociology Centre Maurice Halbwachs Ecole´ des Hautes Etudes´ en Sciences Sociales Paris, France January 2019 3 Lorsque deux textes, deux affirmations, deux id´eess'opposent, se plaire `ales concilier plut^otqu’`ales annuler l'un par l'autre; voir en eux deux facettes diff´erentes, deux ´etatssuccessifs du m^emefait, une r´ealit´econvaincante parce qu'elle est complexe, humaine parce qu'elle est multiple. Marguerite Yourcenar, M´emoiresd'Hadrien 4 Acknowledgements This thesis is the result of years of research and learning, a project that came to an end thanks to the support of multiple people and institutions that I would like to recognize. First of all, I would like to thank all the interviewees who freely shared their life stories with me, and those people who anonymously answered the surveys analyzed in this study. Without their participation and sincerity, the development of this research would not have been possible. I would also like to thank my thesis advisor Caroline Guibet Lafaye and my co-advisor Juan Carlos Castillo, who guided this study with rigor and patience from the beginning. Thank you for encouraging me to trust my intuitions and opinions, while teaching me, at the same time, that the re- searcher's work is also to question these. I would like to recognize three fundamental people in the development of this study, with whom I shared from the beginning the questions that are at the basis of these pages, and with whom I shared a large part of my academic training in Paris: Natalia Slachevsky, Paula Cubillos and Marcelo Mi~no.I'd also like to recognise my office colleagues in the Maurice Halbwachs Center, Efi Markou and Reguina Hatzipetrou-Andronikou, with whom I shared the practice of everyday writing, and everything this implies. We have been together in all the defeats, and all the victories. The thesis is also dedicated to the friends with whom I discussed inequal- 5 6 Acknowledgements ities in Chile and the world, and the daily struggles of practically writing a thesis: the Maino brothers, Pablo Fa´undez,Natalia Brice~no,Valeria Ayola, Diana Ospina, Willem van Ewijk, Diego Milos and Gualo Gonz´alez. I also give thanks to those who gave me comments and corrections for an innumer- able number of texts, in all their different versions, and in different languages, such as Ciryl Jayet, Maxime Parodi, Ciaran Thapar, Diego Y´a~nez,Alexandra de Kerangal Mac´eand Jean Pierre Mac´e. I would like to thank the CONICYT program Becas-Chile, the EHESS, the Center Maurice Halbwachs and the Center for Social Conflict and Cohesion Studies (COES), for funding my years of study and for my participation in congresses and research stays in different countries. Also, I'd like to express appreciation for the attention of the people who work in the libraries and cafes where I sat to read and write. I would like to thank, in particular, the Maurice Halbwachs Center team at the Campus Jourdan of the ENS and those who work at the Danube caf´e in the 19`emearrondissement in Paris. Likewise, to those who work in the archives library and the mediatheque of Saint-Malo. Finally, to Astrid de Kerangal and Ella Wharton de Kerangal, who kindly received me at their house where I finished writing this thesis, in Putney, London. Last, but certainly not least, this thesis is dedicated to my parents Ricardo Y´a~nezand Mar´ıaIsabel Rojas, and all my family spread across Chile, France, England, and USA, for all the help and company offered. This is especially dedicated to my wife Julie and our two little dinosaurs, Nina and Lola, who have walked with me during all these years. Julie, thank you for giving me all your support day by day. It was my main source of stability and energy during the long days of writing and rewriting. Nina and Lola, voil`ala th`ese, which in a way resembles your first words: pas ¸ca and l`a-bas. Contents Acknowledgements5 Abstract9 Introduction 11 1 Data, variables, and methods 35 1.1 Quantitative data and methods................. 39 1.1.1 Description of the data.................. 39 1.1.2 Variables.......................... 41 1.1.3 Regression analysis. Ordinary least squares (OLS)... 50 1.1.4 Interpreting the quantitative data............ 51 1.2 Qualitative data and methods.................. 52 1.2.1 Description of field survey and data........... 52 1.2.2 Interpreting the qualitative information......... 55 2 Chilean socioeconomic inequalities and their presence in the public reason 59 2.1 Chile. A case of recent economic growth and high long-standing inequalities............................. 62 2.1.1 Inequalities in the education system........... 72 2.2 Inequality in the public reason.................. 79 2.2.1 The discourse of candidates for public office. Presiden- tial elections since the return of democracy....... 83 2.2.2 The discourse of government officials. The voice of the parliament......................... 92 2.2.3 The discourse of judges. The voice of the Constitu- tional Court........................ 100 2.3 Summary............................. 106 1 2 CONTENTS 3 Perceptions about inequality 111 3.1 Perceived income differences................... 113 3.1.1 Theoretical discussion and hypothesis.......... 113 3.1.2 Descriptive analysis.................... 117 3.1.3 The weight of factors in individuals' perceptions about inequality......................... 121 3.1.4 Discussion......................... 127 3.2 Social inequality in individuals' narratives........... 131 3.2.1 The rich are out of reach................. 133 3.2.2 Equals but treated differently.............. 152 3.2.3 Factors moving perceptions of inequality........ 165 3.3 Summary............................. 180 4 Beliefs about inequality 187 4.1 Ideal inequality. Tolerable income differences.......... 191 4.1.1 Theoretical discussion and hypothesis.......... 191 4.1.2 Descriptive analysis................... 194 4.1.3 The weight of factors on individuals' beliefs about in- equality.......................... 198 4.1.4 Discussion......................... 205 4.2 The weight of individuals' experiences and the acceptability of inequalities........................... 208 4.2.1 Type of experience operating in the evaluation of social inequality......................... 211 4.2.2 Adaptations to inconsistencies. Daily narratives of le- gitimation......................... 225 4.3 Summary............................. 251 5 Preferences about inequality 255 5.1 Structural and subjective factors influencing preferences about inequality............................. 260 5.1.1 Theoretical discussion and hypothesis.......... 260 5.1.2 Descriptive analysis.................... 264 5.1.3 The weight of factors on individuals' preferences about inequality......................... 272 5.1.4 Exploratory relationships. Perceived and ideal inequal- ity factors in inequality preferences............ 279 5.1.5 Discussion......................... 281 5.2 Individuals' representations confronted with scenarios of in- equality.............................. 286 5.2.1 Inequality through spheres of justice. Experience as a factor of legitimization.................. 289 5.2.2 Hierarchy between types of inequality and principles of justice........................... 306 5.3 Summary............................. 315 Conclusion 319 Bibliography 329 Appendix 351 5.4 Data, variables, and methods.................. 351 5.4.1 List of interviewees.................... 351 5.4.2 Descriptive statistics of interviewees........... 353 5.4.3 Letter of informed consent................ 354 5.4.4 Codes of analysis..................... 356 5.5 Perceptions about inequality................... 360 5.5.1 Perceived salaries according to occupations....... 360 5.6 Beliefs about inequality...................... 361 5.6.1 Correlation indexes of perceived and ideal inequality. 361 5.7 Preferences about inequality................... 364 5.7.1 Perceived and ideal inequality factors in inequality pref- erences........................... 364 Summary in French 367 List of Figures 2.1 GDP per capita (current US$ 2018)............... 65 2.2 The \best estimate" of income earners inequality in Chile, 1850-2009. Gini coefficient.................... 68 2.3 Percentage of people according to educational level (25 years old or more)............................ 75 2.4 Average score in math and language tests by type of estab- lishment.............................. 78 3.1 Perceived wage inequality across time (median)........ 118 3.2 Perceived chairman and unskilled worker salary across time (median).............................. 118 3.3 Perceived inequality (median) gap by education level...... 120 3.4 Perceived inequality gap by income quintile........... 121 3.5 Interaction between perceived inequality and education level.. 126 3.6 Interaction between perceived inequality and income quintile. 127 3.7 Prevalence