The caste system in India has operated for millennia. The system divided Hindus into rigid hierarchical groups, with segregation between higher and lower castes, privileges for those at the top, and the repression of those at the bottom. From the 18th Century onwards, when Britain established colonial rule, castes became a defining feature of Indian life. Caste is intrinsically linked to an individual’s social and economic outcomes. The lower castes – Scheduled Castes, former untouchables – and indigenous tribes – Scheduled Tribes – have fared much worse than upper castes in terms of educational and occupational achievement, wages and consumption, and business ownership. It was only in 1950, when independent India produced its constitution, that discrimination on the basis of caste was banned. Affirmative action was implemented for SCSTs (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes – who made up a quarter of the population in the 2011 census) and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) – estimated at 41% of the population by the National Sample Survey Organisation – in the form of quotas in national and state legislatures, local government, higher education, and government jobs. This has had a positive impact on poverty reduction and educational attainment, but significant gaps remain, and SCSTs continue to be subjected to violence by upper castes. The stigma associated with being lower caste means individuals are not viewed on their own merits, but through a stigmatised caste lens. Such social exclusion and discrimination can likely affect a person’s beliefs, perceptions and aspirations. This is not an issue confined to India. Hierarchies in social identities have been found to be integrally related to divergences in economic status around the world. On average, historically marginalised and discriminated groups perform worse on typical indicators of achievement compared to those from higher-ranking social groups. This applies across race, ethnicity, religion and gender. Where there is a large social divide, adherence to choices that confirm identity stereotypes can influence and restrict the choices of minority groups. This creates a vicious cycle where poor self-valuations due to the internalisation of negative stereotypes result in the perpetuation of adverse outcomes. BARRIERS TO SUCCESS Recent research has shown that labour market outcomes are not just explained by differences in cognitive skills, but also influenced by socioemotional traits. The internalisation of negative self-images has the potential to detrimentally influence exactly such characteristics. In our study of around 2,000 students at the University of Delhi – which reserves 15% and 7.5% of seats for SC and ST applicants respectively, and 34 |
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTI5NzM=