Evaluate The Role Of Government In Reducing Social Inequality

Social inequality measures the disparity in wealth between different socio-economic groups in society. Social inequality can lead to social unrest and is usually prevalent in cities where there is a growing gap between the rich and poor as economically the city continues to grow.

For example, in Sri Lanka an EDC in South Asia, the Gini coeffect is 0.39 just below the international alert level whereas in Colombo its financial capital, and most densely populated city- the Gini coefficient is 0.46. Which means income and social inequality is concentrated here along with 30% of the population. 50% Of which live in USS dwellings usually located on the Flood plains near the CBD for better access to jobs in the centre. In the worst Slum in the city Gothampirua, 51% of USS dwellers don t have access to sewage connection and 9% live in absolute poverty- contrasted with the Middle-class area, Cinnamon Gardens- a closeted neighbourhood home to the most affluent elites in Colombo. The stark contrast of the two areas in one city shows social inequality is rife.

Firstly, the Government has been very successful in alleviating social inequality. In a Top-Down rebranding strategy called Sahaspaura- 68,000 USS dwellers were to be relocated to 20 high density flats to free up land for commercial development in the centre- which would drive FDI. Induvials in flats would have access to clean toilet facilities, and a title deed to the land. Meaning they have a registered address to enrol their children in education. This could break the poverty trap with a positive multiplier effect which would simultaneously reduce the digital divide as well. Because better education means better prospects for the future as children may be English speaking and skilled- therefore more employable and earning higher wages which they can send back home to poor relatives and pass their skills onto their kids and so forth, reducing generational poverty. Higher incomes also mean higher taxes meaning more revenue to governments to improve infrastructure- such as education and so on reducing social inequality. Furthermore, Mahinda Chitana- vision for the future is a 10-year initiative that aims to provide 3 million jobs directly and indirectly, increase the life expectancy to 80 and aims for 8% economic growth per annum. More employment opportunities would reduce social inequality by increasing quality of life and standard of living. However, the success of both iniatives performed by the government is questionable. Most flats in Sahaspura were too expensive for residents who moved back to the slums, the flats were also poorly built and the effectiveness of the programme was not as desired- perhaps because of its market led approach. And Mahinda Chitana gives projected figures that may not be attained.