This chapter examines the long-term development of inequality in Europe, focusing on disparities between individuals, households and nations. It explores how social and economic inequalities have evolved over time, influenced by economic forces as well as factors such as gender, race and class. The chapter also considers global inequality, discussing the gap between rich and poor nations and the factors that have contributed to economic divergence or convergence. By analysing the historical roots of inequality and the role of institutions in mitigating or exacerbating it, the chapter provides insights into the social and economic consequences of unequal income distribution and how it shapes economic policy debates today.

Identifying the populations and regions most vulnerable to climate change, this chapter features voices including Nakeeyat Dramani Sam from Ghana, highlighting the disproportionate impacts on young people and marginalised groups. Understanding ‘vulnerability’ is the key to addressing climate change. Jevanic Henry from Saint Lucia discusses rising sea levels and frequent hurricanes threatening coastal communities. The chapter emphasises the need for targeted adaptation strategies and global support to build resilience among low-income countries, small island developing states (SIDS), and Indigenous Peoples, and local communities (IPLCs). Isaac Nemuta, a Maasai pastoralist from Kenya, shares how prolonged droughts are decimating livestock. The chapter discusses the unique challenges faced by vulnerable groups, including limited resources, inadequate infrastructure, and political marginalisation. Calls for increased international aid, robust policy measures, and tailored climate resilience plans are emphasised, with examples like the Climate Prosperity Plans from Bangladesh and the Philippines. Empowering local communities through education, sustainable practices, and inclusive governance is crucial.

The chapter explores the intricate relationship between sex, gender, science, and technology within STS, examining historical and contemporary intersections. Early STS studies, influenced by second-wave feminism, initially addressed gender inequalities in science and technology, emphasizing women’s underrepresentation. Over time, research expanded to encompass various ways sex and gender interact with these domains. One central theme is social constructivism, questioning Western science’s objectivity and universality. Researchers argue that science and technology aren’t value-neutral, reflecting societal norms and biases. Gender imbalances persist in science and technology jobs, influenced by stereotypes, bias, and limited role models. Work–life challenges, preference differences, and ability disparities contribute to the gender gap. The chapter delves into technology-gendering, examining how certain technologies, such as home appliances, crash dummies, and digital assistants, are associated with specific genders. These design choices either reinforce or challenge traditional gender norms. The discussion extends to gender’s impact on science communication, technological embodiment, and cyberspaces. Online spaces raise concerns about gendered harassment and cyberbullying. The passage also addresses gender imbalances in tech entrepreneurship and leadership, emphasizing women’s underrepresentation in startup ventures. The intersection of gender and AI reveals biases in algorithmic decision-making.

Second-wave feminism arrived late to economics. It initially permitted criticism of how Gary Becker positioned gendered inequalities in families as rational choices, not as injustices. Methodologies were heterogenous. ‘Equity’ approaches, like Barbara Bergmann’s, engaged statistical analysis and extended Becker-style rational choice theory to reposition gendered inequalities as effects of unfair decision constraints. ‘Critical’ approaches, like Nancy Folbre’s, focused on deficits in the valuation of women’s care, quantifying the full economic worth of care-work, with policies for provisioning in response to needs. Quickly, feminist economists recentred poverty, focusing on ‘lone motherhood’ in the US in its connection with race, and on empowering global South development consistent with justice for women and girls in poor families. Methods developed by Esther Duflo and the ‘poor economists’ included institutional descriptions of poverty traps, with randomised controlled trials studying how incentives affect family agency. However, local knowledge could not easily apply to larger regions. As for the US, just as Becker mobilised controversial 1970s sociobiology against women’s liberation to rationalise women’s specialisation in household labour as an effect of biological comparative advantage in bearing children, categories of binary gender and binary biological difference initially prevented feminist economists from studying injustices experienced by queer families.

Constitutions are, above all, a compact among equals: they represent a contract that aims to include everyone, on an equal footing. This fact is explicitly reflected in a majority of constitutions, which appear openly committed to a principle of legal equality. The problem is that, from its very origins, this egalitarian constitutional ideal encountered enormous difficulties that prevented it from becoming ae reality in practice. Almost every area covered by the equality principle - whether we refer to the rights of racial, sexual or ethnic minorities, or to the workers’ rights – was transformed into a space for legal and political dispute. This chapter explores a few of those “disputed territories”, including conflicts around social rights; gender inequality; and indigenous rights. In this way, this text pays attention to the continuous, unfinished battle between the constitutional ideal of equality and a political practice systematically oriented to defy it.

The main purpose of this chapter is to study gender inequality within the inventive activities in three emerging countries – Brazil, India, and Mexico – using the framework of knowledge economics. It aims to determine which factors that influence a growing propensity of women to be inventors help reduce gender inequality in knowledge economies. In addition, the chapter contributes policy proposals that aim at increasing female participation in inventive activities. The key questions for this research are as follows: What are the characteristics and dynamics of female inventive activities in emerging countries with different economic development paths? What factors influence women’s propensity to invent? Based on the results of the econometric model proposed in this chapter, the inventive variables, such as the stock of prior knowledge, the size of inventor teams, the type of patent holder, technological field, and the presence of foreign researchers – positively influence women’s propensity to become inventors in a differentiated manner in each country. These findings validate how some variables could influence the inclusion of a greater number of women in research teams and the deployment of their potential inventive activities. The chapter proposes policies aimed at reducing gender inequality in the knowledge economy.

This chapter provides an introduction to Intellectual Property, Innovation and Economic Inequality. It begins by discussing the problem of economic inequality, including the scale of that problem, types of economic inequality, and extant research on such inequality. The chapter then outlines the structure of this volume, which is divided into three parts: (1) theoretical, empirical, and policy issues; (2) intellectual property and national inequality; and (3) intellectual property and global inequality.

Women do not receive their fair share when it comes to patenting and are far less likely to own patents. This disparity is due in part to the inherent biases in science, technology, and the patent system and in part to the high costs of the patent application process. This chapter therefore proposes an unconventional new regime of unregistered patent rights to relieve women and other disadvantaged inventors of such costs and biases and thereby increase their access to patent protections. To explain the proposal, this chapter details the challenges facing women and other disadvantaged inventors in applying for patents as well as the fact that other intellectual property regimes, such as copyright and trademark, allow such unregistered rights. The chapter also addresses a number of objections that the proposal would inevitably raise. In particular, it shows that, because the proposed unregistered patent system would grant rights for only three years and protect only against direct and knowing copying, these rights would be unlikely to deter incremental or complementary innovation. Such rights would also be fully subject to invalidation under a preponderance of the evidence standard.

In a prior study, one of the authors uncovered a striking degree of imbalance with respect to rates of copyright registrations between men and women. Although women made up roughly half of the population between 1978 and 2012, they authored only one third of all registered works. If the U.S. Copyright Office is to properly “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,” then we must seek to understand what may be contributing to lower rates of creative authorship and copyright registration by women. This chapter discusses several factors that may contribute to the historic inequality in rates of copyright authorship by men and women. Far from exhaustive, the chapter provides a snapshot of some of the structural and economic factors that may discourage authorship by women. Specifically, the authors consider whether the gender disparity in rates of authorship is reflective of gender dynamics in other intellectual property holdings, property ownership more generally, and gender disparity within various creative professions.

Theoretically, all inventions are equal under the law: they receive the same scope of protection for the same period, backed by the same remedies. In reality, such equality has been strongly compromised. Patents are concentrated in the hands of big companies and privileged individuals. Women and minorities – as well as firms they own – are less likely to file for patents and have their patents granted. Small companies are also less likely to file and receive patents than strong incumbents. This chapter argues that some changes in the patent system can trigger better accessibility, affordability, and equality. It builds on the author’s earlier proposal to replace the patent record with a decentralized database that would include more information about inventions from more sources and additional functions. Under the proposal, inventors would submit patent applications to a shared patent record instead of a central patent office. During the examination process and throughout the duration of the patent, industry and state actors would be able to update the record. For example, third parties could submit prior art, scientists could weigh in on obviousness, patentees could offer licenses, and courts could list outstanding cases that pertain to the patent.