John Edwards

UK inner cities: Problem construction and policy response☆☆☆

This article examines UK inner city policy since 1965. The author divides the period into three phases and argues that the different policy approaches in each phase arose from differences in how the ‘inner city problem’ was perceived. US influences on policy makers, ‘social’ versus ‘pathological’ explanations of inner city problems, and the public versus private debate are outlined and the policy responses are analysed. The article concludes by arguing that, for effective policy making, the problem of urban deprivation should be disaggregated into its many different components.

What purpose does equality of opportunity serve

Abstract The equalisation of opportunities between individuals and (by extension) between groups is often treated as though it were a moral imperative (not withstanding the habit of the personnel industry to promote it on grounds of business efficiency). But the only outcome of equality of opportunity that we would recognise and could measure would be the distribution of individuals and groups across the reward system as brought about by the constant application of the merit system. Equality of opportunity therefore, is inextricably linked to merit, the merit system and the reward system. Equality of opportunity is in effect equality of opportunity to compete for different rewards — and hence to be unequal. A paradox arises therefore insofar as we think that equality of opportunity should be pursued for its own sake but at the same time it serves the merit and reward systems which are thoroughly utilitarian or consequence‐regarding.

Debate rational nationalism

Michael Banton’s piece begins in confusion. His title derives from another—Spira’s ‘Ethnicity and nationality: the twin matrices of nationalism’ (2002)—and it questions Spira’s assumption that the two entities are, in fact, somehow twinned. The import of the ‘twin’ concept is not defined, however: some human twins are very close in personality and some, indeed, are genetically identical; but highways and military assaults can be twinned—and this implies more parallelism than identity. As well, with ‘nationality’, Spira has introduced one of the many unclear concepts in the literature. Varouxakis (2001) summarises interpretations extending from what now would be most commonly understood as ‘ethnic group’, to a synonym for either citizenship (the most popular view, perhaps) or simply nationalism tout court—quite a range. In fact, Spira seems to use the term more or less as a synonym for nationalism, and this latter concept is what Banton is interested in, too; consequently, it would have been clearer not to have taken over Spira’s use here. But, to further complicate matters, we find Banton himself using ‘nationality’ (in the ‘world of practice’ section), with the ‘popular’ connotation of citizenship (‘the criteria for nationality are those governing eligibility for a passport’). Not the most auspicious beginning, then, particularly for a piece apparently motivated by the appearance of Conversi’s (2002) festschrift for Walker Connor—who, as I pointed out in my own contribution to that anthology, has long been animated by a desire for terminological accuracy. If we assume that Banton’s thesis here is some sort of comparison between ethnicity and nationalism, then a difficulty connected with that ‘twinning’ still remains—in fact, it is amplified: since no scholar would deny that there is some relationship between the two concepts, the matter of degree (i.e., the construction we are to put on ‘twinning’) becomes quite central. But, to escape these terminological coils in what is to be a short response, let me turn to the substance of the matter by referring to a further difficulty with the title: it is misleading as to the content and the thrust of the text itself. Banton is not as interested in considering correspon-

On what ‘ought’ to be: The flaw in employment equality practice for minorities

Abstract One of the most commonly used indicators of ethnic or racial inequality in employment is disparities in minority representation in certain occupations or job types. Under‐representation in desired occupations is taken as prima facie evidence of discrimination in most affirmative action programmes. Affirmative action policy then requires that discrimination be eliminated and minority representation be increased until it matches the availability in labour draw areas. The ethnic, racial or religious composition of the availability pool then becomes the template against which employers must match their workforce composition and, in so doing, it comes to occupy a moral dimension: the structure of the availability pool ‘ought’ to be replicated because it represents the morally desirable situation that would exist in workforces were there not employer‐discrimination. This is common equal opportunity and affirmative action practice (illustrated here with examples from America and Northern Ireland) and it...