Mumbai: The inaugural Ipsos Equalities Index 2023 shows startling views of urban respondents, who believe women (30 per cent) and people with physical disabilities (26 per cent) are the most disadvantaged lot, receiving the most unequal and unfair treatment in the country. Other cohorts that figured in the list included, people of specific religions (26 per cent), people with mental health conditions (20 per cent), transgender/ non-binary people (20 per cent), immigrants (18 per cent), ethnic communities (17 per cent), senior citizens (16 per cent) etc. Lowest in the pecking order who get treated least unequal were men (12 per cent) and young adults (13 per cent), the survey showed.
For global citizens, those perceived to be treated most unfair and unequal were people with physical disabilities (33 per cent), women (26 per cent), people with mental health conditions (25 per cent), lesbians/ gay people/ bisexuals (24 per cent), senior citizens (24 per cent), people from minority ethnic community (23 per cent), immigrants (22 per cent) etc. Least unequal were men (6 per cent) and young adults (11 per cent).
Who should be promoting equality and reducing inequality in the country?
Urban Indians believe the onus rests most with the govt (40 per cent), followed by media (28 per cent), individuals (21 per cent), religious leaders (18 per cent), employers (14 per cent) etc. And the responsibility lies least with advocacy organisations (9 per cent) and groups experiencing inequality (13 per cent).
Though there is a feeling among urban Indians, a lot is already being done to foster equality in India. 19 per cent believe we have already gone too far in the crusade, 30 per cent feel we have done about right while 24 per cent say we need to go further.
Though when we look at all macro issues facing the country, almost 4 in 10 (39 per cent) counted inequality among key issues facing the nation.
Ipsos India CEO Amit Adarkar elucidating on the findings of the Ipsos Equalities Index said, “We live in an unequal world which is fraught with preconceived notions, biases, and inequalities. India as a market recognises these societal flaws and through different campaigns and schemes has been addressing them, whether it is about elevating the status of women and providing them equal rights, exhorting education and financial freedom or addressing biases against some of the other cohorts. That is probably the reason the findings are not so stark for India. Rural women are more disadvantaged especially those from the informal sector with low incomes.”
Meritocracy vs Other Factors
So, if we look at what determines success in India. Indians were seen to be highly skeptical as compared to most global markets. 25 per cent felt success depends on one’s own merit and effort, while 21 per cent believed it depended on factors beyond their control and others were undecided.
Also, for measuring barometers for measuring a fair society, Indians had most reservations with only 21 per cent endorsing equal opportunities for everyone and 23 per cent advocating same quality of life for all for everyone.
“It is somewhat hard to provide equal opportunity to all, as it depends on other factors like education, soft skills, and finances. Though India has been reserving special quota for the disadvantaged to provide them impetus, which is perceived as unfair to more deserving. Many of us are oblivious to differences in equality & equity. It is worthwhile to educate the masses about the differences. After all, equality initiatives may not bring about enough relief to under-privileged or disadvantaged sections and they may end up with a disadvantage. Principles of equity may be useful in giving a fair opportunity to catch up,” stated Adarkar.
Methodology
These are the results of a 33-country survey conducted by Ipsos on its Global Advisor online survey platform and, in India, on its IndiaBus platform, between February 17 and March 3, 2023. For this survey, Ipsos interviewed a total of 26,259 adults aged 18 years and older in India, 18-74 in Canada, South Africa, Turkey, and the United States, 20-74 in Thailand, 21-74 in Indonesia and Singapore, and 16-74 in all other countries. The sample consists of approximately 1,000 individuals each in Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Thailand and the U.S., and 500 individuals in each of Argentina, Belgium, Chile, Colombia, Hungary, Indonesia, the Republic of Ireland, the Netherlands, Peru, Poland, Romania, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey. The sample in India consists of approximately 2,200 individuals, of whom 1,800 were interviewed face-to-face and 400 were interviewed online. Samples in Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the U.S. can be considered representative of their general adult populations under the age of 75. Samples in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Indonesia, Ireland, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, and Turkey are more urban, more educated, and/or more affluent than the general population. The survey results for these countries should be viewed as reflecting the views of the more “connected” segment of their population.
India’s sample represents a large subset of its urban population – social economic classes A, B, and C in metros and tier 1-3 town classes across all four zones. The data is weighted so that the composition of each country’s sample best reflects the demographic profile of the adult population according to the most recent census data. The “Global Country Average” reflects the average result for all the countries where the survey was conducted. It has not been adjusted to the population size of each country and is not intended to suggest a total result. Where results do not sum to 100 or the ‘difference’ appears to be +/-1 percentage point more/less than the actual result, this may be due to rounding, multiple responses, or the exclusion of “don’t know/not sure” or not stated responses. The precision of Ipsos online polls is calculated using a credibility interval with a poll where N=1,000 being accurate to +/- 3.5 percentage points and of where N=500 being accurate to +/- 5.0 percentage points. For more information on Ipsos’s use of credibility intervals, please visit the Ipsos website. The publication of these findings abides by local rules and regulations.
Leave a Reply