Московский экономический журнал 12/2019

DOI 10.24411/2413-046Х-2019-10225

Аспекты проблемы вертикальной социальной мобильности как фактора экономического роста

Aspects of the problem
of vertical social mobility as a factor of economic growth

Колин Юрий Владимирович, кандидат философских наук, докторант, кафедра теории культуры, Институт философии и социально-политических наук, Южный федеральный университет, г. Ростов-на-Дону, rostovchanin-rostov@rambler.ru

Kolin Yuri Vladimirovich, PhD in Philosophy, Doctoral student, the department of cultural theory, Institute of Philosophy, Social and Political Sciences Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, rostovchanin-rostov@rambler.ru

Аннотация: В статье впервые
проанализированы аспекты влияния уровня вертикальной социальной мобильности на
перспективы экономического роста. Актуальность проблемы усиления вертикальной
социальной мобильности заключается в ее влиянии на уровень общественной
поляризации в условиях высокого уровня социального неравенства в России. Целью
исследования служит анализ уровня вертикальной социальной мобильности как
опосредованного фактора, влияющего на перспективы экономического роста в
России.

Новизна исследования заключается в анализе
политики усиления вертикальной социальной мобильности как опосредованного
стимула экономического роста в России.

Методология основывается на анализе
социального неравенства и вертикальной социальной мобильности как факторов,
влияющих на социальную интеграцию и общественную стабильность. Уровень
вертикальной социальной мобильности рассматривается с точки зрения влияния на
экономический рост.

Обоснована значимость сокращения
социального неравенства и усиления вертикальной социальной мобильности в
условиях высокого уровня общественной поляризации в России и низкого
экономического роста. Существует необходимость дальнейшего исследования уровня
вертикальной социальной мобильности как одного из стимулов усиления
экономического роста в России.

Summary: The article analyzes aspects of the influence of vertical social
mobility and prospects for economic growth for the first time. The relevance of the problem of applying models of affirmative acts in Russia lies in
their influence on the vertical social mobility, and economic growth in
conditions of high social inequality and increasing trends in social
polarization in Russia. Objective of the research is to analyze the
prospects for affirmative acts in the context of its influence on the level of
vertical social mobility, social integration and, as an indirect factor, on the
prospects for economic growth in Russia.

 Novelty of the
research is the analysis of the policy of affirmative acts as a factor in
increasing the opportunities for social mobility as an indirect stimulus for
economic growth in Russia.

The methodology is based on the analysis of
social inequality and vertical social mobility as factors affecting social
integration and social stability. The level of vertical social mobility considered
in terms of influence on economic growth.

The author substantiates
the significance of social inequality and vertical social mobility in
conditions of a high level of social polarization and low economic growth in
Russia. The importance of affirmative acts is substantiated for stimulating
economic growth, reducing social inequality, developing social integration and
strengthening vertical social mobility in conditions of a high level of social
polarization in Russia. There is a need for further research on vertical social
mobility rate  as one of the incentives
to increase economic growth in Russia.

Ключевые слова: социальное неравенство, вертикальная социальная мобильность, экономический рост.

Keywords: social inequality, vertical social mobility, economic growth.

INTRODUCTION

The international community has recognized the importance of social
inequality by including it in the 2015 UN Sustainable Development Goals. Social
inequality in the world has reached the stage when it has become a serious
obstacle to development [5; 41; 47].

OECD experts believe
that a significant lag in income growth of lower social groups from higher ones
is currently a global trend (OESD, 2019)[40]. Nobel laureate J. Stiglitz argues
that in societies with a high level of social inequality there cannot be an
effective functioning of its systems, since the highest social group
concentrates too much power and the actions of society in this case are aimed
at the primary implementation of the interests of these groups, and not their
own [20]. A high level of social
inequality is an obstacle to the development of human capital, the functioning
of social elevators, the development of the consumer market and dynamic
economic growth [41; 37].

Social inequality is
increasingly manifested not only in income inequality (a 1% increase in the
welfare of the poor and middle class gives a 0.38 % increase in GDP growth rates [4], but also in social and
cultural constraints that don’t allow immigrants from lower social groups climb
the social ladder and fulfil their potential.

There is a growing
trend of concentration of world wealth in the hands of 1 % of the population,
which actually controls world resources [41]. The closeness of higher social groups and the
prevalence of various forms of nepotism, the development of plutocracy [1; 32] reduces the legitimacy
of the elite, its competence and ability to adequately protect public interests
and solve social problems. Income inequality is passed on to future generations
in [33].

The processes of social
polarization build the border between the higher and lower social groups
absolute, lead to the erosion of the middle class [37] and the formation of the precariat, which is a new
class of humiliated and offended people, deprived of social rights and
prospects of social advancement [19].

In the work “Sociology
of the Revolution”, P. Sorokin believed
that the reason for both the February and October Revolutions was the inability
of lower social groups to fulfil their needs, human potential due to the estate
structure of Russian society [18].

Currently the gap between the
higher and lower social groups in Russian society reaches 15 times, with a
continuing trend of a decrease in the disposable income of the lower population
groups and an increase in the concentration of income in the higher social
group [6; 4].

In Russia, the social
inequality problem is recognized both in
the May decrees of President Putin (2012) and the government, but no specific
strategy has yet been developed to solve it [4].

THE PROBLEM OF SOCIAL INEQUALITY IN RUSSIA

According to
researchers, about 90 % of
all property and financial resources of the Russian Federation are concentrated
in the highest social group, comprising 3 % of the population, which exceeds the indicators of
1905 [21; 24; 15].

The share of wealth
owned by the top decile in Russia (actually 1 %) is 86 %, in
Brazil — 73 %, in
the USA — 75%, in the UK — 54% [43].
Analysts have argued that the level of social inequality in Russia is redundant
and its structure has been stable since the early 2000s [16].

10 % of the wealthiest citizens account for 82 % of all personal wealth in Russia, according to the
Global Wealth Report (2018) prepared by Credit Suisse. In terms of the
concentration of wealth, Russia is ahead of the United States, where 10 % of the wealthiest citizens account for 76 % of the total personal income in the country. In
China, 10 % of the wealthiest citizens have 62 % of the total personal income of the population .

The processes of social
polarization has been going on in Russian society: contrary to the current
trend of a general decrease in disposable incomes of citizens [9], according to the Global Wealth Report (2016) study
conducted by Credit Suisse Bank, the Russian Federation took third place in the
world (96 people) by the number of dollar billionaires, second only to the
United States and China [17].

Developing a social
system in the openness and mobility direction, developing forms of social advancement of lower
social groups representatives
without bridging deep
social gaps, the closed top group of the Russian business elite (3 % of the Russian population), which currently owns 90 %
wealth of the entire
population, becomes the main beneficiary of economic growth Russian property [24], which creates conditions for the instability of
Russian society.

SOCIAL POLARIZATION AND VERTICAL
SOCIAL MOBILITY: ASPECTS OF THE PROBLEM

Within the framework of
free competition and the free market [49], the
problem of the closedness of the social hierarchy and the insurmountable border
between higher and lower social groups cannot be solved as it can be seen from
the history examples. In history, this problem veriety of the social
polarization has been reduced by administrative methods through state intervention.

The low level of
vertical social mobility [37] does
not contribute to the development of human capital; a huge gap in income and
property of higher and lower social groups is an indicator of the closedness of
the social system and contributes to low rates of economic growth.

For social growth in
the post-industrial era, the level of human capital development [29], career growth, and the possibilities of creative
self-realization of citizens become decisive. Successful stimulation of
economic growth requires the strengthening of vertical social mobility as one
of the conditions for the development of human capital, renewal and increase
the diversity of the social system.

According to
researchers [35], the greatest efficiency of an organization is
promoted not so much by increasing employee incomes as by increasing their
involvement in the organization’s activities, based on personal growth of
employees and career progression opportunities.

Economic growth
requires career opportunities, a high level of vertical social mobility, strong
social lifts, while, according to researchers, in modern society there are
gender, social and national restrictions on vertical social mobility [40].

There is a trend to increase social barriers between higher and lower
social groups [33] and to build an insurmountable border between them,
unless measures are taken at the state level to stimulate vertical social
mobility of representatives of lower social groups.

There is a global
conflict between the society needs in
the development of human capital, social integration, the expansion of
mechanisms for renewing the elite, the strengthening of economic growth drivers
and the processes of social polarization, raising social barriers, the rigid
hierarchical structure of modern society, which sets an insurmountable border
for the social progression of lower social groups representatives.

The high level of
social inequality and the low level of vertical social mobility are largely determined by ineffective policies related to
lower social groups, both from the state and private entities.

AFFIRMATIVE ACT PROGRAMS INWESTERN
COUNTRIES AND THE USSR

One of the forms of
limiting social inequality and social polarization in Western society are
affirmative act programs. As compensatory justice [39], affirmative act programs are aimed at increasing the
level of social integration and strengthening the vertical social mobility of
lower social groups according to social, racial, national or gender criteria.
The policy of limiting social gaps and increasing the economic opportunities of
lower social groups was used as one of the ways to overcome the Great
Depression in the 30-s. XX century [30]. US President F. Roosevelt attached great importance to equalizing
starting positions as a condition for achieving legal equality, who proposed
the adoption of the Second Bill of Rights, dedicated to social rights [45].

Unlike in Great
Britain, calls are being made to return to the classical principles of
liberalism in the USA: free competition and equal rights for all individuals,
which imply limiting affirmative act programs as inconsistent
with market principles [2; 48].
Critics of the affirmative acts position see it as an artificial interference in the of social
processes course
course, giving the non-market
advantage of one of the social groups. Advocates of affirmative acts [31; 46; 34] see the significant results of affirmative acts as a
tool to enhance social inclusion, increase the stability of the social system
and overcome the effects of racial segregation in the world of work and
education.

The social origin
criteria [12], as a condition of social advancement, despite its
shortcomings, was part of the Soviet policy of affirmative act and contributed
to a partial equalization of the starting opportunities for representatives of
higher and lower social groups [8; 6]. The
level of social inequality, the gap between the incomes of higher and lower
social groups was one of the lowest in the world in the USSR (with a generally
low level of income): 4 times in the USSR and about 5.5–6 times in European countries, at that time as in the
USA, this gap reached 15 times [6].

According to the data
for 1983, among respondents aged 50–59, 82.1 % had a social and professional status higher than
their parents, among respondents 40–49
years old — 74%, and among 30–39 years old — 67%,
which serves as an example of a high level of social progression in the Soviet
social system [22; 23; 12]

Examples of quick
social development: during the USSR industrialization
[38; 36] and in China from the 1970s to the present [25], they have some common features: large-scale
activation of social elevators based on affirmative act policies. Periods of
rapid social growth in the USSR [14]
correlate with periods of maximum
application of the positive discrimination policy and promotion of a high level of vertical social mobility.
Statistical data allow us to conclude that the policy of stimulating vertical
social mobility can serve as one of the indirect drivers for economic growth.

By the time of the
collapse, economic growth in the USSR showed a negative value, and the level of
vertical social mobility also reached a minimum. A policy of affirmative act
formally existed, but was actually relinquished, a closed social group, the
highest social caste formed: the “nomenclature”, which, according to researchers, was one of the
reasons for the stagnation and collapse of the USSR [3; 11].

As Russia moved to a
market economy, within the liberal concept framework and criticism of the totalitarian past, the forms of
affirmative acts that existed in the USSR were canceled. Claims that a policy
of affirmative acts may not be evidence of a return to the past, but a path to
Russia’s dynamic development are unpopular among researchers.

In developed Western
countries, they have abandoned the classical understanding of the liberal model
and don’t consider the rejection of the use of affirmative act as the prospects
for the development of the liberal concept, but a form of increasing its
effectiveness.

Formed in the first
years after the collapse of the USSR, in Russian society, the rigidity of a
high level of social inequality and a low level of vertical social mobility has
remained in Russian society since the 2000s [23; 16; 4], which correlates with a low rate of economic growth
in Russia [42]. The social
stratification of Russian society is almost twice as high as the distribution
of income between the higher and lower social groups compared with those in
Eastern Europe [7].

The gap between the
higher and lower social groups in Russian society reaches 15 times, with the
continuing trend of social polarization: a decrease in the disposable income of
the lower population groups and an increase in the concentration of income in
the higher social group [6; 4].

According to some
researchers [50], the brain drain,
Russia’s loss of its human capital due to emigration, the inability of highly
skilled workers to realize their opportunities for social advancement, has
become one of the most tangible losses of Russia since the collapse of the
USSR, seriously limiting its potential for economic growth.

Despite the significant
differences between the programs of affirmative acts in the USSR and in the
West, they had a positive effect in terms of social integration, social
stability and improving the quality of human capital, providing a wider
representation in the fields of education, science, and the state apparatus of
representatives of social, gender, national and racial groups that were at the
lower levels of the social hierarchy.

A high level of vertical
mobility is noted by researchers as one of the main conditions that determine
long-term dynamic economic growth [13]. And here the experience of the widespread use of
affirmative act models aimed at increasing vertical social mobility may be
in demand in Russia as a way to increase the contribution of lower social
groups to social wealth and accelerate social growth.

There is a relationship
between high levels of social inequality, low levels of vertical social
mobility and low levels of economic growth, which makes it relevant to analyze
the applicability of Western and Soviet models of positive discrimination in
the new conditions of modern Russia as one of the ways to reduce social
inequality, increase vertical social mobility and accelerate economic growth.

RESULTS

The policy of stimulating vertical social mobility,
expanding the prospects for social advancement for lower social groups in
Western countries is a significant factor in improving the quality of human
capital, increasing civic participation and the contribution of lower social
groups to economic growth.

There is a very high level of social inequality and
government policy is in demand in Russian society, aimed at increasing social
integration, increasing vertical social mobility and reducing social
polarization.

The correlation analysis of the vertical
social mobility level and the level of economic growth in the framework of the
Soviet and Western experience in using affirmative act models can be useful in
determining the forms of affirmative act in modern Russia. Attention level of Russian researchers and government
institutions to the problem of affirmative act as a factor in reducing social
polarization and an indirect factor in accelerating economic growth cannot be
considered sufficient.

CONCLUSION

The problem
of the correlation of the vertical social mobility level and the level of
economic growth has not been sufficiently studied in Russian and foreign
research literature.

Most Russian and foreign researches of the social inequality problem focus on the analysis
of economic factors stimulating economic growth, while the analysis of
increasing vertical social mobility to reduce social inequality, develop human
potential and accelerate economic growth is out of the researchers scope.

Trends in low economic growth and an increase in social polarization in
Russia make it possible to study affirmative act models as a way to reduce
social polarization and increase the contribution of lower social groups to
economic growth.

Discussing the
relevance of affirmative act models in Russia, Soviet and Western experience
merits further research and development. This study can be considered as an
invitation to further discussion on the problem of affirmative act as an
indirect factor in enhancing social integration and stimulating economic growth
in Russia.

References

1. Bard A., Soderquist J. Netocracy. The new ruling elite and life after capitalism. St. Petersburg: Stockholm School of Economics in St. Petersburg, 2004, 252 р. https://royallib.com/book/bard_aleksandr/Netokratiya_novaya_pravyashchaya_elita_i_gizn_posle_kapitalizma.html             ISBN 5-315-00015-X, ISBN 5-315-00029-X
2. Vendik Yu. «Affirmative act» in the USA. What is it and why Trump abolishes it // BBC News. 2018. URL: https://www.bbc.com/russian/features-44767737 (Accessed 17.11.2019)
3. Voslenskiy M.S. Nomenclature. The ruling class of the Soviet Union. Moscow: “SovietRussia”, 1991, 624 p. https://royallib.com/book/voslenskiy_mihail/nomenklatura_gospodstvuyushchiy_klass_sovetskogo_soyuza.html
4. Grigoriev L.M., Pavlyushina V.A. Social inequality as a problem of Russia’s economic strategy // World New Economy. 2017. N 3. P 58-71. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sotsialnoe-neravenstvo-kak-problema-ekonomicheskoy-strategii-rossii
5. Grigoriev L.M., Pavlyushina V.A. Cross-country inequality: dynamics and the problem of development stages // Economic Issues. 2018. N 7. P 5-29. http://ac.gov.ru/files/content/17234/voprosy-economiki-pdf.pdf
6. Dankanich S.A. Income inequality: types and consequences // Problems of the modern economics. 2011. N 3. P 59-63. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/neravenstvo-dohodov-naseleniya-vidy-i-posledstviya
7. Zutsman G., Radaykin E., Picketti T., Novokmet F. Stat Overview: From the Soviets to the oligarchs: inequality and property in Russia, 1905-2016 // LeninCrew. 2017. URL: https://lenincrew.com/statistical-review-3/ (Accessed 17.11.2019)
8. Ilyukhov A.A. Politics of Soviet power in the world of work 1917–1929: abstract of a doctoral thesis on history. Smolensk, 1999, 36 p. https://e-catalog.nlb.by/Record/BY-NLB-br175005
9. Kudrin does not exclude a social explosion, TASS, 06/17/2019 Lipset S. Reflections on Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Chapter: New Challenges to Capitalism, Anthology. TheLimitsofPower, «Century XX and Peace», 1994.
10. London defends affirmative act, BBC News, 06/26/2008 //URL: news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/uk/newsid_7475000/7475423.stm
11. Nazarov M. The ruling and doomed class: Interview with M. Voslensky // “Possev” magazine. 1984. N 11. P 28-33. URL: http://yury108.blogspot.com/2013/02/blog-post_1877.html (Accessed 17.11.2019)
12. Novoseltseva T. Nomination in the personnel policy of the Soviet state in the 1920–1930s (based on materials from the Smolensk region): abstract of a doctoral thesis on history. Smolensk, 2004, 24 p.https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01002665838 ISBN 978-5-93255-303-9.
13. North D., Wallis D., Weingast B. Violence and social order. Conceptual framework for the interpretation of the written history of mankind. Moscow: Europe, 2010, 480 p. https://vrn-politstudies.nethouse.ru/static/doc/0000/0000/0134/134203.9nn2kk1r9u.pdf
14. USSR in numbers … [by years]: a brief statistical digest // Central Statistical Directorate under the Council of Ministers of the USSR. Moscow. 1991, 320 p. https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01008313844
15. Remizov M. The pathology of inequality // Institute of National Strategy. 2016. URL: http://www.instrategy.ru/smi/article353.htm (Accessed 17.11.2019)
16. Salmina A. Excessive inequality and human development // Human Development Report in the Russian Federation. Moscow: Analytical Center under the Government of the Russian Federation. 2014. Р. 84-106. http://ac.gov.ru/files/publication/a/4758.pdf
17. Sedlov D., Alikina K. Russian billionaires are getting richer and Russia — is conversely // RBC. 2016. URL: https://www.rbc.ru/money/22/11/2016/583469339a7947f801d7631b (Accessed 17.11.2019)
18. Sorokin P.A. Sociology of the revolution. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2005, 704 p. https://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3740430
19. Standing, G. The precariat: a new dangerous class / trans. from English N. Usova. Moscow, 2014, 328 p. ISBN 978-5-91103-209-8. https://clck.ru/K2KcV
20. Stiglitz J. The price of inequality. What stratification of society threatens our future? / trans. from English Rozhdestvenskaja E. Moscow, 2016, 255 р. https://clck.ru/K2L7T
21. Uzbekova A. The Ministry of Finance warned of serious economic problems // Russian newspaper. 2016. URL: https://rg.ru/2016/07/30/v-minfine-predupredili-o-sereznyh-ekonomicheskih-problemah.html (Accessed 17.11.2019)
22. Shkaratan O.I. Experience in the study of social reproduction in cities of the USSR // The Human Factor in Social Reproduction (Interdisciplinary Research). Moscow: Science. 1987, 88 p.
23. Shkaratan O.I., Yastrebov G.A. A comparative analysis of the processes of social mobility in the USSR and modern Russia // Social Sciencesand Modernity. 2011, N 2, Р. 5-28. http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/2013/02/01/1251414466/Shkaratan.pdf
24. Shapovalov A. Everyone who acquired overwork. Wealthy citizens own virtually all financial assets and savings in the Russian Federation // Cont. 2019. URL: https://cont.ws/@putanik/1293799 (Accessed 17.11.2019)
25. Yanli S. The specifics of socio-economic transformation in China: abstract of a doctoral thesis on history. Moscow, 2006, 25 p. https://www.dissercat.com/content/spetsifika-sotsialno-ekonomicheskikh-preobrazovanii-v-kitae
26. Anderson, E., 2002, “Integration, Affirmative Action, and Strict Scrutiny,” New York University Law Review, 77 (November): 1195–1271.
27. Atkinson, A., Lee, R. and Smeeding, T.M. 1995. Income Distribution in OECD Countries. Paris: Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.
28. Barnes, K., 2011, “Is Affirmative Action Responsible for the Achievement Gap Between Black and White Law Students? A Correction, a Lesson and an Update,” Northwestern University Law Review, 101 (Spring): 791–812.
29. Bell D. The coming of post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York: Harper Colophon Books, 1974, 507 p. https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01000529926
30. Beaudreau Bernard C. Mass Production, the Stock Market Crash and the Great Depression: The Macroeconomics of Electrification. // Greenwood Press. New York, 1996, 182 p. https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1399922 ISBN 0-595-32334-0
31. Boddie E. The Constitutionality of Racially Integrative Purpose // Cardozo Law Review, 2016, N 38, P. 531-550. http://cardozolawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/BODDIE.38.2.pdf
32. Butcher B. Planet Plutocrat. The countries where politically connected businessmen are most likely to prosper // The Economist, 2015. URL: https://www.economist.com/international/2014/03/15/planet-plutocrat (Accessed 17.11.2019)
33. Corak M. Income Inequality, Equality of Opportunity, and Intergenerational Mobility // Discussion Paper N 7520. Bonn, 2013, 28 p. http://ftp.iza.org/dp7520.pdf
34. Fullinwider R. Affirmative Action // Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2018. URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/ (Accessed 17.11.2019)
35. Handy C. The Second Curve. London, 2015, 240 p. ISBN 1-8479-4133-8 https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23346846-the-second-curve
36. Harrison M. Soviet industrial production, 1928 to 1955: real growth and hidden inflation // Journal of Comparative Economic. 1999, N 28 (1), P. 134–155. https://studylib.net/doc/12791297/soviet-industrial-production—1928-to-1955—real-growth-a…
37. Krueger A. The Rise and Consequences Inequality in the United States. 10 p. URL: https://milescorak.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/34af5d01.pdf (Accessed 17.11.2019)
38. Moorsteen R. Prices and Production of Machinery in the Soviet Union in 1928-1958 // Harvard University Press. 1962 URL: https://clck.ru/K2NMF (Accessed 17.11.2019)
39. Nagel T. Equal Treatment and Compensatory Discrimination // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1973, N 2 (Summer), P 348–363. https://ru.scribd.com/document/38850013/Nagel-Equal-Treatment-and-Compensatory-Discrimination
40. OECD.(10.09.2019) Income Inequality and Poverty. http://www.oecd.org/social/inequality-and-poverty.htm.
41. Piketty T. Capital in the Twenty-First Century // Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 2014, 696 p. URL: https://clck.ru/K2NXh (Accessed 17.11.2019)
42. Report for Selected Countries and Subjects // World Economic Outlook Database. International Monetary Fund. April 2018. URL: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/01/weodata/index.aspx (Accessed 17.11.2019)
43. Rajan R., Zingales L. Saving Capitalism from the Capitalists // Princeton: Princeton University Press. 2004, 369 p. URL: https://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1292560 (Accessed 17.11.2019)
44. Sander, 2004, “A Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools,” Stanford Law Review, 57 (November): 367–484
45. Sunstein C. The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’s Unfinished Revolution — And Why We Need It More Than Ever. New York, 294p. ISBN 9780465083336 https://usslide.net/document/online-free-second-bill-of-rights-fdr-s-unfinished-revolution-and-why-we-need-it-more-than-ever-book-online
46. Sigal A. Race, Class, and Affirmative Action // New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 2015, 348 p. ISBN: 978-0-87154-001-0 https://www.russellsage.org/publications/race-class-and-affirmative-action-0
47. Stiglitz J.E. The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future // New York: W.W. Norton & Company. 2012, 560 p. https://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4512106
48. Williams D. Do Racial Preferences Affect Minority Learning in Law Schools? // Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. 2013, N 10 (June), P. 171–195. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2254177
49. Lipset S. Reflections on Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Chapter: New Challenges to Capitalism, Anthology. The Limits of Power, «Century XX and World», 1994. 
50. Grigoriev L.M Social Inequality in the World — Interpretation of Unobvious Trends // Journal of the New Economic Association. 2016 N 3 (31). P 160-170.