Religion and Income Inequality: The Paradox of the South

[rug]

Posted: 07/29/2013 1:13 pm
Julie J. Park.
Assistant Professor of Education, University of Maryland

The New York Times recently reported on a new study by economists from Harvard and UC Berkeley on income mobility across the country. The research team found stark differences by geographical region, with the odds of moving to a different income bracket being lowest in the southeast and higher in major metropolitan areas. They identified four broad factors in areas that contribute to income mobility: mixed-income neighborhoods, two-parent households, better schools, and higher rates of civic engagement, "including membership in religious and community groups."

Why religion? There are numerous reasons, but I'd like to highlight one in particular: Religious communities as a source of social capital. As Robert Putnam addressed in Bowling Alone, religious institutions such as churches, synagogues, and mosques bring people together in a way that strengthens community life. This is vital in a society that is increasingly fragmented. This connectedness likely affects income mobility via social capital -- the relationships and relational networks that lend themselves to the exchange of knowledge and resources. For instance, in a religious community, people might form relationships that lead to helpful information about finding a job, navigating social services, or starting a business. Rich relational networks also have payoffs for education, which has natural dividends for income mobility. Being involved in a religious community gives kids the opportunity to have multiple adults in their lives who are invested in their well-being, as documented by sociologist James Coleman and others. These overlapping social relationships (e.g., knowing an adult from the neighborhood, but also attending mosque with them) can reinforce social norms that are beneficial for educational outcomes.

Another perk is that social capital networks can help people access valuable information that helps them navigate the educational system, which has particular dividends for low-income students. In a study of first-year college students, I found that Korean American low-income youth had a particularly high rate of taking SAT preparatory classes. Taking SAT prep was higher for Korean Americans who identified as Protestant, and I suggested that these students are able to access information about applying to college through social networks in economically diverse immigrant churches.

Such social connections can potentially happen in any type of civic organization (and the Harvard/Berkeley study highlights the role of membership in non-religious community groups), but religious institutions tend to be relatively enduring. They often provide a joint social service function, especially among immigrant populations, and can provide rhetorical frameworks that help people endure through difficult times ("Remember Moses wandering through the desert...&quot .

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/julie-j-park/religion-and-income-inequ_b_3659949.html

The Harvard and Berkeley study:

http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org/

[Jim__]

1. From the Executive Summary

( Source ):

...

Although tax policies may account for some of the variation in outcomes across areas, much
variation remained to be explained. To understand what is driving this variation and better isolate the
effects of the tax expenditures themselves, we considered other sets of factors that have been proposed in
prior work. Here, we found significant correlations between intergenerational mobility and income
inequality, economic and racial residential segregation, measures of K-12 school quality (such as test
scores and high school dropout rates), social capital indices, and measures of family structure (such as the
fraction of single parents in an area). In particular, areas with a smaller middle class had lower rates of
upward mobility. In contrast, a high concentration of income in the top 1% was not highly correlated
with mobility patterns. Areas in which low income individuals were residentially segregated from
middle income individuals were also particularly likely to have low rates of upward mobility.
The quality of theK-12 school system also appears to be correlated with mobility: areas with higher
test scores (controlling for income levels), lower dropout rates, and higher spending per student
in schools had higher rates of upward mobility. Finally, some of the strongest predictors of upward
mobility are correlates of social capital and family structure. For instance, high upward mobility areas
tended to have higher fractions of religious individuals and fewer children raised by single parents. Each
of these correlations remained strong even after controlling for measures of tax expenditures. Likewise,
local tax policies remain correlated with mobility after controlling for these other factors.

We caution that all of the findings in this study are correlational and cannot be interpreted as
causal effects. For instance,areas with high rates of segregation may also have other differences that
could be the root cause driving the differences in children’s outcomes. What is clear from this research is
that there is substantial variation in the United States in the prospects for escaping poverty. There are
some areas in the U.S. where a child’s chances of success do not depend heavily on his or her parents’
income. Understanding the features of these areas and how we can improve mobility in areas that
currently have lower rates of mobility is an important question for future research that we and other
social scientists are exploring. To facilitate this ongoing research, we have posted the mobility statistics
by area and the other correlates used in the study on our website.

[Jim__]

2. Krugman talked about the same report.

From The New York Times:

...

So what’s the matter with Atlanta? A new study suggests that the city may just be too spread out, so that job opportunities are literally out of reach for people stranded in the wrong neighborhoods. Sprawl may be killing Horatio Alger.

The new study comes from the Equality of Opportunity Project, which is led by economists at Harvard and Berkeley. There have been many comparisons of social mobility across countries; all such studies find that these days America, which still thinks of itself as the land of opportunity, actually has more of an inherited class system than other advanced nations. The new project asks how social mobility varies across U.S. cities, and finds that it varies a lot. In San Francisco a child born into the bottom fifth of the income distribution has an 11 percent chance of making it into the top fifth, but in Atlanta the corresponding number is only 4 percent.

When the researchers looked for factors that correlate with low or high social mobility, they found, perhaps surprisingly, little direct role for race, one obvious candidate. They did find a significant correlation with the existing level of inequality: “areas with a smaller middle class had lower rates of upward mobility.” This matches what we find in international comparisons, where relatively equal societies like Sweden have much higher mobility than highly unequal America. But they also found a significant negative correlation between residential segregation — different social classes living far apart — and the ability of the poor to rise.

And in Atlanta poor and rich neighborhoods are far apart because, basically, everything is far apart; Atlanta is the Sultan of Sprawl, even more spread out than other major Sun Belt cities. This would make an effective public transportation system nearly impossible to operate even if politicians were willing to pay for it, which they aren’t. As a result, disadvantaged workers often find themselves stranded; there may be jobs available somewhere, but they literally can’t get there.

...

[rug]

3. Thanks. That commentary was helpful in parsing this document.