Equality and Human Rights Commission Research report 53 Building understanding of fairness, equality and good relations Naomi Jones, Catherine Bromley, Chris Creegan, Rachel Kinsella, Fiona Dobbie and Rachel Ormston with Alison Park and Miranda Phillips National Centre for Social Research and Scottish Centre for Social Research Building understanding of fairness, equality and good relations Naomi Jones, Catherine Bromley, Chris Creegan, Rachel Kinsella, Fiona Dobbie and Rachel Ormston with Alison Park and Miranda Phillips National Centre for Social Research and Scottish Centre for Social Research Equality and Human Rights Commission 2010 First published Spring 2010 ISBN 978 1 84206 266 1 EQUALITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS RESEARCH REPORT SERIES The Equality and Human Rights Commission Research Report Series publishes research carried out for the Commission by commissioned researchers. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Commission. The Commission is publishing the report as a contribution to discussion and debate. Please contact the Research team for further information about other Commission research reports, or visit our website: Research Team Equality and Human Rights Commission Arndale House The Arndale Centre Manchester M4 3AQ Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0161 829 8500 Website: www.equalityhumanrights.com You can download a copy of this report as a PDF from our website: www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/policyresearch/pages/default.aspx If you require this publication in an alternative format, please contact the Communication Team to discuss your needs at: [email protected] Contents Tables and Figures iii Acknowledgements iv Executive summary v 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Aims and objectives 1 1.3 Methodology 2 1.4 Context of the research 6 1.5 Structure of report 8 2. Review of existing evidence 9 2.1 Methods 9 2.2 Evidence review findings 12 2.3 Summary 37 3. Understandings of fairness, equality and good relations 39 3.1 Understandings of fairness 39 3.2 Understandings of unfairness 40 3.3 Understandings of equality 41 3.4 Understandings of good relations 43 3.5 Understanding the terms together 44 3.6 Summary 46 4. Attitudes towards fairness, equality and good relations 47 4.1 To what extent do fairness, equality and good relations exist in Britain? 47 4.2 The importance of the equality strands 55 4.3 Factors that shape attitudes 60 4.4 The importance of fairness, equality and good relations 61 4.5 Summary 64 5. Equality, fairness and good relations in practice 66 5.1 Examples of unfairness and inequality 66 5.2 Case study examples 67 5.3 Relative acceptability of inequalities or unfairness 72 5.4 Summary 72 i 6. Implications 74 6.1 Measuring and tracking attitudes: the creation of a robust survey tool 74 6.2 Implications for shaping attitudes 76 Appendices 1. Draft survey questions 80 2. Recruitment leaflet 108 3. Topic guide 110 4. Focus group participant break down 117 References 118 Endnotes 122 ii Tables 1.1 Age band, educational attainment and location of each group 4 2.1 Summary of evidence review questions and themes identified 14 2.2 Burchardt and Vizard’s (2007) core capabilities 16 2.3 Indicators of cohesion, England, 2003-08 27 2.4 Indicators of cohesion, England and Wales, 2007/08 29 Figures 1.1 Context of focus groups 7 2.1 Attitudes to income inequality, wealth sharing and redistribution, 1983-2007, Britain 20 2.2 Attitudes to wealth sharing, 2002-07, Britain and Scotland 21 4.1 Range of views on the extent of fairness in Britain 48 iii Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Liz Speed, David Darton and Morag Patrick at the Equality and Human Rights Commission for their assistance with this research. At the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) and Scottish Centre for Social Research (ScotCen) we would like to thank Alan Ross for his assistance with the fieldwork, Sue Arthur, Ashley Brown and Harriet Ludford for their diligent analysis of the qualitative data, Alison Park, Sarah Butt and Susan Reid for their help in developing the survey questions and Lesley Birse and Lindsey Dawson for their administrative support. We are also indebted to all those people who participated in the research. Our thanks go to the stakeholders who participated in the seminars and to the people who gave up their time to share their experiences with us in the focus groups in England, Scotland and Wales. Without these contributions, this work would not have been possible. iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive summary The Equality and Human Rights Commission (the Commission) has among its aims reducing inequality, eliminating discrimination, strengthening good relations between people, and promoting and protecting human rights. These are challenging aims particularly given that there are varied understandings of the concepts of equality, fairness and good relations. Not enough is known about how the public interpret and value these concepts. This research, carried out for the Commission by the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) and the Scottish Centre for Social Research (ScotCen) aims to build on existing evidence on public attitudes to explore further the public’s understanding of the concepts ‘equality’, ‘fairness’ and ‘good relations’ and the key factors that influence public attitudes about these issues. It also considers the implications of people’s understanding and attitudes for achieving change. This report covers the research in England, Scotland and Wales. A companion report (Dobbie et al., 2010) reports the Scottish findings only. The research included a number of related components. First, existing evidence on public attitudes was reviewed. Second, a series of 23 focus groups throughout England, Scotland and Wales were held followed by two stakeholder seminars. The knowledge from these two stages was used to assist with the drafting of a set of survey questions which can be piloted and tested to form an instrument that measures and tracks public attitudes. Key findings • The literature review indicated that the main drivers of attitudes to equality, fairness and good relations are likely to include a combination of socio- demographic factors (such as age and education) and underlying core values and beliefs. Area or community level characteristics do not appear to be as significant as individual drivers. • Equality was broadly split by focus group participants into equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. While the first of these was seen as desirable the second was seen as neither desirable nor achievable. • People generally struggled with the term 'good relations' and did not use it in everyday life. v BUILDING UNDERSTANDING OF FAIRNESS, EQUALITY AND GOOD RELATIONS • There was a view that Britain can be too fair. Participants with this view felt some people get more out of the system than they put in. This was related to a perception of deserving and undeserving groups. • One view was that Britain was not equal, as certain groups or individuals had access or opportunities that others did not. • When discussing case studies of situations illustrating the concepts of fairness and equality, participants were often divided in their views of the examples, illustrating the range of public opinion. • As a whole, the three concepts were seen as unobtainable. But they attracted public support when broken down into understandable and specific contexts, and were recognised as important components of society. Findings Existing evidence • No studies currently exist that can fully answer the question of what people understand by the terms equality, fairness and good relations. • Two issues arise when considering the issue of equality: between whom does it apply and what should there be equality of? The second of these is commonly discussed in terms of processes, outcomes and opportunities. • Attitudes to economic inequality have been extensively researched in Britain. This work shows there to be: a high degree of concern about the extent to which inequality exists, less pronounced support for measures to address it, and limited understanding of the issues involved. • Extensive research about good relations and community cohesion also exists. But most of these studies have pre-defined community cohesion, for example in terms of strength of belonging to neighbourhoods, social contact, respect and good relationships between people from different backgrounds, and levels of involvement in local communities. No studies have sought to discover how much value people place on good relations or what they think it comprises. • Existing literature suggests that the main drivers of attitudes to equality, fairness and good relations are likely to include a combination of socio-demographic factors (such as age and education) and underlying core values and beliefs. Area or community level characteristics do not appear to be as significant as individual drivers. Focus group findings vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Understandings of equality, fairness and good relations • Understanding of the concepts of equality, fairness and good relations were related to both personal experiences and perceptions and the context in which they were discussed. They were seen as being distinct from each other yet highly interwoven and, at times, interdependent. • There were two broad views of fairness: the first saw fairness as treating everyone the same regardless of their characteristics; the second saw it as treating people differentially according to their characteristics, but these were not mutually exclusive. • Equality was broadly split into equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. While the first of these was seen as desirable the second was seen as neither desirable nor achievable. • Although fairness and equality were sometimes used interchangeably, people generally felt that fairness was something that occurred on a personal level, between individuals and communities, whereas equality was something that could be legislated for and happened on a bigger scale. • Good relations was understood in three contexts: in the community, in an employment context and in international relations.