C. Muntaner et J. Lynch, Income inequality, social cohesion, and class relations: A critique of Wilkinson's neo-Durkheimian research program, INT J HE SE, 29(1), 1999, pp. 59-81
Wilkinson's "income inequality and social cohesion" model has emerged as a
leading research program in social epidemiology. Public health scholars and
activists working toward the elimination of social inequalities in health
can find several appealing features in Wilkinson's research. In particular,
it provides a sociological alternative to former models that emphasize pov
erty, health behaviors, or the cultural aspects of social relations as dete
rminants of population health. Wilkinson's model calls for social explanati
ons, avoids the subjectivist legacy of U.S. functionalist sociology that is
evident in "status" approaches to understanding social inequalities in hea
lth, and calls for broad policies of income redistribution. Nevertheless, W
ilkinson's research program has characteristics that limit its explanatory
power and its ability to inform social policies directed toward reducing so
cial inequalities in health. The model ignores class relations, an approach
that might help explain how income inequalities are generated and account
for both relative and absolute deprivation. Furthermore, Wilkinson's model
implies that social cohesion rather than political change is the major dete
rminant of population health. Historical evidence suggests that class forma
tion could determine both reductions in social inequalities and increases i
n social cohesion. Drawing on recent examples, the authors argue that an em
phasis on social cohesion can be used to render communities responsible for
their mortality and morbidity rates: a community-level version of "blaming
the victim." Such use of social cohesion is related to current policy init
iatives in the United States and Britain under the New Democrat and New Lab
or governments.