Inequalities Seminar Series
Tuesdays, 12.30 to 1.30pm
The Inequalities Seminar Series at the International Inequalities Institute is a venue for scholars from LSE and beyond to present their innovative work on social and economic inequality. The seminars are open and free to all.
Upcoming Inequalities Seminars

Inequality values as excess shares
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 20 January 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online public event. LSE Centre Building 1.04.
Speaker:
Professor Anthony Shorrocks, Visiting Professor, LSE IIIInequality researchers are severely hampered by the inability to interpret inequality values in an intuitive way. Yet a simple solution has been overlooked. If a resource is shared between one rich person and n equally poor people, the value of the Gini coefficient corresponds to the share of the rich person over and above their “fair share”. This reinterpretation in terms of excess shares may be regarded as applying a new measuring scale or “metric” to Gini values. The same procedure can be applied to other inequality measures, offering the prospect of reviving interest in families of inequality indices which have fallen out of favour over the past 50 years despite their attractive properties.
Register to attend in-person
Register to attend online
Intergenerational income mobility and assortative mating in Sweden
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 27 January 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. LSE Centre Building 2.04.
Speaker:
Professor Markus Jäntti, Professor of Economics, Stockholm University(Joint work with Jesper Roine of the Stockholm School of Economics)
Intergenerational income mobility is mostly studied by examining the association of fathers' and sons' (long-run) labour earnings. Broadening from this narrow focus, we demonstrate that in Sweden, both the level and trend in intergenerational mobility varies by both population -- father/mother/both parents against sons/daughters/all offspring -- as well as income concept. We explore the welfare implications of both inter- and intragenerational mobility and, once family incomes have been introduced, assortative mating. We further conduct some explorative analysis of policy changes with potential to affect patterns of assortative mating.

Residential diversity in young adulthood and later life attitudes toward immigration
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 3 February 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. LSE Sir Arthur Lewis Building LG.04.
Speaker:
Dr Haley McAvay, Associate Professor of Sociology, LSE Department of SociologyInequalities in residential environments have received a lot of attention in understanding the appeal of anti-immigration parties across advanced democracies in recent years. This paper explores the long-term association between neighborhood context in adolescence and attitudes towards immigration later in life drawing on a cohort study from the UK (Next Steps) matched with census data. Drawing on the premises of the impressionable years hypothesis and contact theory, we posit that as a space of socialisation, the local area that one experienced in adolescence is influential to the development of immigration attitudes. Our findings suggest that ethnic diversity during one’s adolescence has a persistent association with attitudes even when adulthood individual characteristics and residential environment are taken into account. Specifically, we find that living in ethnically diverse areas in adolescence is associated with increased tolerance toward immigration up to three decades later.

Modern labour markets: an employment-capability framework for the future of work
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 10 February 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. LSE Centre Building 2.04.
Speaker:
Professor Kirsten Sehnbruch, Distinguished Policy Fellow, LSE IIIOn a theoretical level, the capability approach can be applied on three different ‘levels’: First, as a framework of thought, second, as a critique of other approaches to welfare evaluation, and third as a formula to make interpersonal comparisons of welfare (Robeyns, 2000). For Sen, their order of importance is precisely this ranking.
Arguments about how the capability approach can serve to frame a debate on employment from these perspectives continues to be under-formulated. The literature that conceptualises aspects of employment is often fragmented and directed at specific topics such as collective agency (Bonvin, 2012; Leßmann, 2022) or job quality (e.g. Green, 2025 and Stephens 2023). The job quality literature, in addition, has mostly focused on operationalising interpersonal comparisons of employment conditions, but has not sufficiently engaged with the distributional questions associated with job quality.
This theoretical paper therefore develops an employment-capability framework; relates it to other theoretical approaches to labour markets; and discusses how it can be used to undertake interpersonal comparisons.

People reject unfairness but normalise inequality
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 3 March 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. LSE Clement House 2.05.
Speaker:
Dr Mario D. Molina, Assistant Professor, Social Research and Public Policy programme, NYU Abu DhabiEconomic inequality is rising worldwide, yet it remains widely tolerated despite people's strong aversion to unfairness and rejection of excessive disparities. Why do people accept the very inequalities they claim to oppose? Existing accounts hold that inequality is acceptable when it results from fair processes and argue that tolerance of inequality reflects misinformation or limited awareness of the systemic inequities that produce it. We propose an alternative explanation: people use moral judgment to assess procedural fairness but rely on experienced inequality to set standards for acceptable disparities. We test this account in a large pre-registered online experiment ($N=3{,}335$) using a fully crossed factorial design that manipulated opportunity inequality, outcome inequality, and social position in a competitive game. The results reveal a stark dissociation: participants consistently deemed unequal opportunities unfair, yet their tolerance for disparities was largely unaffected by how opportunities were distributed. Instead, individuals normalized the level of inequality they personally experienced, adopting it as a baseline for acceptable outcomes, irrespective of procedural fairness.

Private capital markets and inequality
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 10 March 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. LSE Centre Building 2.04.
Speaker:
Dr Clara Martínez-Toledano, Assistant Professor of Financial Economics, Imperial College London; Wealth Distribution and Political Cleavages Coordinator, WID.worldThis paper studies the relationship between the growth in private capital markets and the rise in economic inequalities over the last two decades in the U.S. First, we document that the share of financing raised by early-stage companies from U.S. high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) tripled from 2004 to 2022. Second, exploiting both company- and state-level variation in exposure to the expanded federal capital gains tax exclusion on qualified small business stock (QSBS), we find that QSBS-eligible companies’ probability of staying private increased by 3.6 percentage points, and that the average income gap between HNWIs and other income earners increased by 7.2%. Third, we show that this rise in income concentration appears to have been driven by HNWIs’ excess returns on their early-stage investments relative to public stock market returns. Finally, using counterfactual simulations, we find that HNWIs’ excess returns on these investments accounted for 28% of the growth in the top 0.5% wealth share between 2010 and 2022.

Mapping the industrial revolution: a micro-level analysis of job creation and loss in Victorian Britain
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 17 March 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. Vera Anstey Room, LSE Old Building.
Speaker:
Dr Hillary Vipond, Postdoctoral Fellow in the Transforming Economies team, Complexity Science Hub, Vienna and Atlantic Fellow for Social and Economic EquityThis paper maps job creation and loss during Britain’s Second Industrial Revolution to examine how technological change reshaped access to opportunity. Using full-count census microdata from 1851 to 1911, I construct a new, task-level classification of occupation to track the emergence of new jobs and the decline of traditional work across industries and local labor markets. Because nineteenth-century technological change was not strongly skills-biased, access to new and emerging occupations may have been mediated primarily by family background, gender, or geographic proximity to firms adopting new technologies. Linking micro-level job dynamics to patterns of social mobility, the paper documents the distributional consequences of creative destruction.

Inequalities Seminar with Annalena Oppel (title TBC)
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 24 March 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. LSE Centre Building 2.04.
Speaker:
Dr Annalena Oppel, Research Fellow, Atlantic Fellows for Social and Economic Equity, LSE
Death and taxes: inheritance tax planning and unexpected mortality
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 31 March 2026, 12.30 to 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. LSE Marshall Building 2.06.
Speaker:
Dr Jeanne Bomare, Research Officer, LSE III
Previous Inequalities Seminars

Local versus National: The effect of income (mis)perceptions on inequality beliefs and preferences
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 30 September, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. CBG 2.03.
Speaker: Dr Katy Morris, Postdoctoral Fellow, Swedish Institute for Social Research (SOFI), Stockholm University.
People are notoriously bad at estimating their position in the national income distribution. However, national income distributions can mask huge local-level variation. In light of new evidence that suggests people anchor to more immediate reference groups, we investigate whether people have more accurate perceptions of where they sit in the local income distribution and whether local income corrections induce greater change in individual inequality beliefs and preferences. Findings from a pre-registered survey experiment in the United States reveal that perceptions of household position within the local (county) and national income distributions are equally inaccurate, with respondents defaulting to the middle rung of the ladder at both scales. Though not uniformly stronger, we find that local income corrections produce more consistent changes in outcomes such as meritocratic belief and support for redistribution than national ones. These results challenge the received wisdom that the national context is the natural or default reference group.

Structural Changes and Intergenerational Educational Mobility during the Twentieth Century
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 7 October, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. CBG 2.03.
Speaker: Dr Mobarak Hossain, Assistant Professor, Department of Social Policy, LSE
This study examines the relationship between 'modernization' as part of broader structural changes and intergenerational educational mobility during the twentieth century. Previous research has linked rising mobility to processes such as urbanization, economic development, and educational expansion, but systematic cross-national evidence and mechanisms remain limited, especially outside high-income contexts. We address this gap by constructing harmonized estimates of intergenerational educational mobility for more than 100 countries and combining them with a multidimensional index of modernization. To investigate mechanisms, we employ counterfactual scenarios that probe how mobility would have evolved under alternative modernization trajectories.

Very simple models of economic inequality and how to solve it
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 14 October, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. MAR 2.09.
Speaker: Professor Jean-Paul Faguet, Professor of the Political Economy of Development, LSE
How much economic inequality is purely random? Policy debates focus on factors like human and physical capital and technology as driving productivity differences, which in turn interact with institutional and social factors to determine inequality outcomes. But is it possible that market dynamics are innately inequality-generating? I build very simple agent-based models of exchange economies in which random processes drive high levels of inequality. Some of these are so high that the economy explodes, and GDP falls to zero. I then add simple tax, transfer, and public goods features progressively and find optimal parameters that dramatically reduce inequality. It is possible to do this with modest, realistic levels of taxation and expenditure similar to European countries today. Which raises the question: if the mechanisms are so straightforward, why are we not using them?

(Un-)Persistent Conflict? The Effects of First Globalization Coffee Boom in Colombia
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 21 October, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. CBG 2.03.
Speaker: Daniel Sanchez-Ordoñez, PhD Candidate, Paris School of Economics
This paper examines the determinants and persistence of civil conflict using a new municipality-level dataset from Colombia covering the nineteenth century through the mid-twentieth-century civil war, La Violencia (1948--1965). I combine newly digitized archival records on violent deaths, historical coffee production, and political and demographic characteristics to study how economic shocks shape the geography and intensity of conflict over time. The analysis centers on the First Globalization period, when a coffee export boom reallocated production across space, shifting the agricultural frontier. While the incidence of civil conflict is widespread and persistent across Colombian history, I document that the intensity of violence during La Violencia shifted sharply toward new coffee-producing regions. I show that coffee cultivation generated highly appropriable rents, which enabled the emergence and persistence of economic banditry. Municipalities with greater coffee production hosted more bandit leaders and larger bandit groups, sustaining higher levels of violence during the conflict. These findings provide new evidence on the economic origins of civil conflict and contribute to debates on persistence by showing how large commodity shocks can overturn historical patterns, reshaping both the location and mechanisms of violence over time.

How do social policies unequally restrict reproduction among specific populations?
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 28 October, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. MAR 2.09.
Speaker: Dr Laura Sochas, Chancellor's Fellow and Leverhulme Early Career Research Fellow, University of Edinburgh
In this seminar, Dr Sochas will share the findings of her recently concluded 3-year Leverhulme-funded project, exploring how social policies such as austerity, migration policy and family policy shape reproductive inequalities and health inequalities among parents in the UK and Europe. Through this project, she develops a quantitative approach to “thinking with” the framework of Reproductive Justice, which particularly advocates for the right of all individuals and communities to have children (or not) and to parent with dignity.

Intergenerational Income Mobility around the World: A Meta-Analysis
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 11 November, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. MAR 2.06.
Speaker: Dr Louis Sirugue, Research Officer, LSE III
Intergenerational income persistence is commonly measured as the degree of association between the lifetime income of individuals and that of their parents. Over the last decade, a growing literature has provided national estimates of intergenerational income persistence for a wide range of countries. At the same time, evidence has shown that these estimates are highly sensitive to methodological choices, such as the number of years over which income is averaged, the age at which it is measured, or the set of variables used to predict parental income when it is unobserved. In most cases, data constraints prevent researchers from adopting best practices, limiting comparability across studies. This study systematically compiles national estimates of intergenerational persistence from the literature together with detailed information on their estimation settings. Cross-study variation in these parameters is used to provide a joint assessment of the impact of estimation settings on persistence estimates. Building on these results, national measures are adjusted for methodological differences to provide as consistent a depiction of the variation in intergenerational mobility across countries as possible.

Inequalities Seminar - Is Poverty Decline in India Falterering?
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 18 November, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. CBG 2.03.
Speaker: Professor Peter Lanjouw, Professor of Development Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
These findings of dramatic progress have been widely reported and disseminated in India. The estimates are based on an internationally comparable poverty line of $3 per person per day. This paper points to remaining concerns regarding the comparability of the survey data underpinning the World Bank estimates, as well as with regards to the methods employed to adjust for inflation over time. We implement survey-to-survey imputation procedures that are robust to comparability concerns and that dispense with the need to correct for cost-of-living changes. Rather than applying the World Bank’s international poverty line, our analysis is conducted with the poverty line that was endorsed by the Government of India in 2011/12 and that suggests poverty stood at 22 percent in that year. Our analysis draws on consumption surveys for 2011/12 and 2022/3, as well as employment surveys from 2011/12, and 2017/18-2022/3.

Discrimination Law and the Family
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 25 November, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. MAR 2.09.
Speaker: Professor Tarun Khaitan, Professor (Chair) of Public Law, LSE Law School
Discrimination law has traditionally only regulated the state and the market. Within these domains, discrimination law imposes its duties unidirectionally—the state may not discriminate against citizens, landlords against tenants, retailers against consumers, and so on, but not vice versa. I had argued previously that that discrimination law’s unidirectionality scrambles the classical liberal public-private divide from a binary distinction to a spectrum of publicness. Thus understood, discrimination law remains faithful to the liberal commitment to the public-private divide, while acknowledging—with feminists—that the personal can be political.
In this paper, I will apply this spectral understanding of publicness to assess discrimination law’s choice to only regulate discrimination in the state and the market, and not within the family. In this paper, I will argue that discrimination law’s failure to regulate the family discriminates indirectly based on grounds such as sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, pregnancy, age, and marital status. What is more, this discrimination is almost certainly unjustifiable under existing doctrine. Finally, I will speculate on some feasible ways in which discrimination law could regulate certain forms of discrimination within the family.

Local Cost of Living and the Geography of Inequality: Evidence from Spain
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 2 December, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. CBG 2.03.
Speaker: Dr Beatriz Jambrina Canseco, Research Officer, Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative
Standard measures of poverty and income inequality often overlook how sharply the cost of living varies across places. To address this issue in the case of Spain, I develop a new public database of local consumer price indices tailored to the expenditure patterns of different income groups. Using these local CPIs to deflate household incomes between 2006 and 2022 reveals that national inflation adjustments understate inequality growth during the financial crisis and misrepresent poverty -- overestimating it in rural areas and underestimating its impact in larger cities. The findings highlight the importance of accounting for spatial variation in prices in poverty and inequality measurement, with clear policy implications.

Billionaire Responses to the Recently Increased Appetite to Tax their Wealth
Part of the Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 9 December, 12.30 - 1.30pm. In-person and online seminar. KSW.G.01.
Speaker: Professor Marlies Glasius, Professor in International Relations, Department of Politics, University of Amsterdam
The super-rich (worth $50 million or more) avoid and evade wealth-based taxation a great deal, but little is actually known about how, how much and why the people at the very top of the wealth chain avoid taxation. In this talk I will present a new dataset on the responses of the hundred richest billionaires in democracies to various forms of wealth-based taxation. We gathered data about their personal characteristics, their public statements about wealth-based taxation, and their tax minimization behaviour between 1991 and 2024. Based on open sources including business journalism, tax advocacy, offshore leaks and lawsuits, it considers their material, legal and discursive responses to wealth-based taxation. Findings to date include important changes in the extent and nature of billionaire speech about wealth-based taxation since the global financial crisis, as well as shifts away from the use of tax havens to other forms of transnational or domestic tax minimization.

Equity vs Efficiency of Indirect Taxation in India
III Seminar SeriesTuesday 6 May, 12.15pm - 1.30pm. In-person and online event. Marshall Building, 2.09.
Speaker:
Dr Pierre Bachas, Economist, World Bank Development Research GroupShould countries with constrained income taxation use differentiated commodity taxes for redistribution? This paper quantifies the equity-efficiency trade-off of indirect taxation in India. We estimate behavioral responses to the Value-Added-Tax following a sudden rate cut from 28% to 18% for many non-essential products, using granular administrative data and a difference in differences design. We find that around half of the tax reduction was passed-through to consumers via lower prices, that quantities consumed increased only modeslty, and that reported sales of treated goods only rose by 5 percentage points despite the possiblity to mislabel goods. These results challenge the received wisdom on differentiated commodity taxes: taxing goods consumed mainly by wealthy households might achieve distributional goals at moderate efficiency costs, and complement income taxation along the development path.

Narratives of Inequality
III Seminar SeriesTuesday 13 May, 12.15pm - 1.30pm. In-person and online event. Marshall Building, 2.09.
Speakers:
Professor Joan Costa-i-Font, Professor of Health Economics, LSE Department of Health Policy and co-leader of the Perceptions of Inequality research programme, LSE III
Professor Frank Cowell, Professor of Economics, LSE Department of Economics and co-leader of the Perceptions of Inequality research programme
Jakob Dirksen, PhD candidate, LSE Department of Social PolicyThis seminar examines global and country specific narratives of inequality. We focus on three key dimensions of inequality: income, wealth, and health, and zoom in on inequalities by gender. By tracking online search interest in terms related to inequality across different countries and scraping data from news articles, social media, and forums, we seek to better understand how inequality is perceived, discussed, and framed worldwide. Utilizing natural language processing (NLP), we identify dominant themes, assess sentiment variations, and compare regional differences in public discourse. We also examine patterns in global inequality discussions, such as those linked to macroeconomic performance and demographic composition, providing a data-driven perspective on evolving inequality narratives worldwide.

Patrons, Protégés, and Peers: Workplace Mechanisms of Intergenerational Inequality
III Seminar SeriesTuesday 27 May, 12.15pm - 1.30pm. In-person and online event. Marshall Building, 2.09.
Speaker:
Dr Per Engzell, Associate Professor of Sociology at UCL Social Research InstituteIntergenerational mobility, the extent to which individuals can achieve economic success regardless of their family background, is a key indicator of equality of opportunity. While labor market outcomes reflect both individual traits and firm-level pay-setting, research on intergenerational mobility has largely focused on the former. In this talk, I discuss a larger project that seeks to understand the role of employers in the inheritance of economic status. In contemporary Sweden, sorting across employers accounts for between one-quarter and two-fifths of the intergenerational correlation in labor earnings. Privileged workers tend to sort into firms that both generate higher value-added and distribute a larger share of surplus to employees. Although workers from less advantaged backgrounds benefit equally when employed by high-paying firms, they are much less likely to gain access to them. I quantify the roles of education, occupation, parental job networks, and the inheritance of industry, employer, and local labor market. I then conclude by outlining a broader research agenda using linked employer-employee data to systematically assess how workplace-level mechanisms shape inequality by social origin.

Cumulative exposure to climate risks in Europe: A multidimensional framework for present and future vulnerabilities
Inequalities Seminar SeriesTuesday 3 June, 12.15pm - 1.30pm. In-person and online event. Sir Arthur Lewis Building, LG0.04.
Speaker:
Dr Amaia Palencia Esteban, Research Officer, LSE IIIThis study develops a multidimensional framework to assess cumulative exposure to climate-related risks across Europe, integrating health, energy, transport, and employment vulnerabilities. By mapping risk distribution across regions and measuring dependence, we capture the interconnectedness of exposures and identify key socioeconomic drivers. Our findings reveal a substantial variation in risk distribution, with no clear geographical patterns. Unsurprisingly, household income emerges as the strongest determinant of exposure, except in Italy, where regional disparities play a greater role. We extend this analysis by projecting cumulative exposure to 2050, applying climate scenarios. The results suggest gradual rather than sharp change in exposure over time.

Jobless Industrialization
Inequalities Seminar Series
Tuesday 10 June, 12.15pm - 1.30pm. In-person and online event. Sir Arthur Lewis Building, LG0.04.Speaker:
Professor Marcela Eslava, Professor of Economics, Universidad de Los AndesLess developed economies struggle to absorb large numbers of workers into ‘modern, high-paying jobs. We take advantage of a historic episode of modernization in Colombia–the peak of the industrialization process–to document jobless modernity and show that there is cross-firm heterogeneity in joblessness. We explore the contributions of different potential determinants of jobless modernity: weak human capital, labor-saving modern technologies and regulations in the labor, capital and product markets that affect different modern firms differently. We also explore whether joblessness modernity expresses growth-depressing misallocation of workers to the traditional sector. We do this through a general equilibrium occupational choice model that we inform and quantify using extremely rich micro-data for Colombia during the 1970s that is representative of all workers in the economy, including those that work for informal businesses, and all modern firms. Findings indicate that, although reducing distortions against high productivity businesses and the minimum wage reduces joblessness in the modern sector, expands the modern/formal sector, and generates growth, these policies are less powerful than interventions that effectively improve human capital useful in all occupations. Improving modern entrepreneurial talent boosts growth but only modern entrepreneurs benefit. Positive income effects of labor-saving technologies dominates job cutting effects.




























































































![Lee Elliot Major-01[2]](/all-images/information/lee-elliot-major-012-cropped-200x200.x09d38c59.jpg?h=200&w=200&fit=contain&q=75&f=webp)















































