Andy Stirling on Measuring Cultural Diversity

Measuring Cultural Diversity? a heuristic approach from science and technology policy

Sussex Energy Group

Andy Stirling, SPRUscience and technology policy research

presentation to meeting of the UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversityon Measuring Cultural Diversity,

Barcelona, 1st December 2008

Sussex Energy Group

Measuring Cultural Diversity? a heuristic approach from science and technology policy

Andy Stirling, SPRUscience and technology policy research

presentation to meeting of the UN Convention on Cultural Diversityon Measuring Cultural Diversity,

Barcelona, 1st December 2008

• Diversity in Cultures, Economies and Societies

• Some Key Attributes of Diversity

• A Framework for Analysing Diversity

• An Illustrative Example in Policy-Making

Multiple Rationales for Diversity

Many reasons for social / cultural / economic / technological diversity

reflect context diversity allows sensitivity to heterogeneous conditions

minority cultures, ecological niches, geographical locii



foster innovation diverse configurations and relations stimulate creativity

dynamic interacting practices, paradigms, perspectives





mitigate ‘lock-in’ diverse portfolios resist pressures to concentrate

resist oligopoly, entrapment, monoculture, hegemony






hedge ignorance ‘eggs in different baskets’ ameliorates surprise

reduce impacts unforeseen risks, vulnerabilities, shocks







promote resilience diversity offers a ‘response pool’ for adaptive strategies

enables experimentation and adaptation to challenge







promote resilience diversity offers a ‘response pool’ for adaptive strategies

accommodate dissent diversity helps reconcile plural values and interests

facilitates choice, reduces stakes, resists polarisation


Some Complexities of Diversity

In economics (I guess like culture?) diversity is not a ‘free lunch’

forces trade-offs lower priority options, reduced economies of scale

transaction costs quality standards, administrative burdens


In economics: diversity is not a ‘free lunch’

Diversity can complicate governance

less momentum impeded development along ‘mainstream’ directions

lower coherence capacity for ambiguity, confusion, even conflict



Measuring diversity raises particular issues for democracy

inherently subjective intrinsic plurality both as object and by perspective

tensions with equity rhetorical resource for privilege and special pleading


generates novelty dynamic, inchoate, interactive, innovative

- perceived positive pathways separate from diversity

can aid irresponsibility impede transparency, obstruct accountability?



Diversity raises issues for democracy


Diversity is inherently an aggregate (system-level) property

not of a single element eg: not protection/promotion of specific expression

can vary at nested levels eg: global / regional / local are independent

diversity is not a catch-all exists alongside other distinct cultural priorities



Diversity raises issues for democracy


Positive or negative …

diversity is always inherently complex / dynamic / plural / subjective ...

requires systematic, transparent, accountable, heuristic framework

literature / music / film / art / theatre / dance / opera

genres / styles / provenances / languages / subjects

diversity can be increased in three different ways

What is Cultural Diversity? – many different disciplines converge

increasing diversity

varietynumber of genres in mix

What is Cultural Diversity?

widespread in economics and energy strategy, BUT

- partitioning of categories

eg: ‘popular music’ or “pop, rock, rap, techno, soul…”

- when to start counting?

eg: one record sale? one thousand? 1% of total sales?

- what about varying degrees of representation in cultural portfolio?

eg: “90% / 5% / 5%” or “33% / 33% / 33%” ?- what about the degree to which genres are different from each other?

eg: Italian / German / Russian orchestral vs orchestral / jazz / rock?

“Category counting”:

Existing Approaches to Diversity: Variety

varietynumber of genres in mix


balanceevenness in allocations

varietynumber of elements in mix



varietynumber of elements in mixincreasing

diversity



Existing Approaches to Diversity: Balance

- addresses problem of when to start counting (partitioning)

eg: one record sale? one thousand?

- addresses varying degrees of allocation in total sales

eg: “90% / 5% / 5%” or “33% / 33% / 33%”

- still raise questions over ‘when is it one element and when two’?eg: “classic” / “opera / chamber /

orchestral”

- treats elements as if they are all equally different from each other

eg: “3 types of opera” / “rock, jazz, opera”

BUT:

Widespread in ecology & economics, more recently in energy policy

eg: Herfindahl ( i pi2 )

Shannon ( –i pi.ln pi )


disparitydegree of differences


balanceevenness in contributions





balanceevenness in contributions



Portfolio and taxonomic theories give elegant methods for representing disparity

- eg: Markowitz, Solow, Weitzman)

- represent particular parameters, taxonomies or geometries

BUT:

- do not accommodate contending parameters, taxonomies or geometries

- depend on multiple hidden variables (taxonomies, correlations, covariance, probability distributions)- do not address importance of variety and

balance

Existing Approaches to Diversity: Disparity

NEVERTHELESS: (whether explicit or acknowledged or not)

systematic transparent characterising of disparity is central to diversity measurement

1 Scaling of variety: where variety = 1, = 0

2 Monotonicity of variety: for equal B, D; rises monotonically with V

3 Monotonicity of balance: for given V, D; rises monotonically with B

4 Monotonicity of disparity: for given V, B; rises monotonically with D

5 Scaling of disparity: where aggregate difference = 0; = 0

6 Open Accommodation: is symmetric to any perspective on disparity

8 Parsimony of Form: has few components and simple structure

9 Explicit Aggregation: allows explicit weightings on V, B and D

7 Robust to Partitioning: is insensitive to aggregation on taxonomy

10 Ready Articulation: can be integrated with other priorities

Conditions for a General ‘Diversity Heuristic’

Start with disparity: for any particular perspective, any cultural portfolio can

be represented in multidimensional ‘disparity space’ (of attributes, properties)

Constructing a General Diversity Heuristic

applies equally to: literature

music

film

art

theatre

dance

opera

and diverse classical

critical perspectives: populist

avant garde

national bias

foreign bias

minority interest

Challenge of Objectivity:

This is intrinsic to any classification.

The task of a general diversity measure is to be symmetrical with respect to different classificatory schemes and yield transparent, definitive and comparable results across different taxonomies.

Distances between pairs of elements represent their mutual disparity (da,b )

a

b

c

Start with disparity: for any particular perspective, any diverse mix can


From Cultural Disparity to Cultural Diversity

Distances between pairs of elements represent their mutual disparity (da,b )

Disparity of a portfolio of elements is given as a function of these pairwise distances

a

b

c

da,b db,c

and…

Variety and balance can be captured by weighting this by the product of the proportional importance in the system of each element in the pair (pi.pj) = .pi.pj ij (ij) dij

Start with disparity: for any particular perspective, any diverse mix can


From Cultural Disparity to Cultural Diversity

easily shown to fulfill first six mathematical criteria:

= ij dij.pi .pj

Some Properties of the New Diversity Heuristic

1: if variety = 1; = 0

2: rises monotonically with variety

3: rises monotonically with balance unlike category

counting

4: rises monotonically with disparity unlike

Herfindahl/Shannon

5: if disparity = 0; = 0 unlike

Herfindahl/Shannon

6: generalises for any disparity attributes, dij unlike MVPA,

Weitzman

= ij dij.pi .pj

Easily shown to fulfill first six mathematical criteria

in addition: is robust to partitioning (criterion 7) unlike Shannon,

Herfindahl


PORTFOLIO A

= ij dij.pi .pj


disparity


Herfindahl


rock rap opera

PORTFOLIO A

= ij dij.pi .pj



disparity


Herfindahl

PORTFOLIO A

70% 5% 25%

= ij dij.pi .pj



disparity


Herfindahl

rock rap opera

PORTFOLIO A PORTFOLIO B

70% 5% 25% 70% 25% 5%

{ A } > { B }


Herfindahl

= ij dij.pi .pj



disparity

rock rap opera rock rap opera

= ij dij.pi .pj


allows exploring of weights on variety, balance, disparity (9) unique

in addition: is robust to partitioning (criterion 7)


´ = ij (dij) .(pi .pj)

= ij dij.pi .pj






0 0

´

ij dij0

diversity property

variety

= ij dij.pi .pj






0 0

0 1

´

ij dij0

ij pi.pj

diversity property

variety

balance

= ij dij.pi .pj






0 0

0 1

1 0

´

ij dij0

ij pi.pj

ij dij

diversity property

variety

balance

disparity

= ij dij.pi .pj





0 0

0 1

1 0

1 1

´

ij dij0

ij pi.pj

ij dij

ij dij.pi.pj

diversity property

variety

balance

disparity

diversity



New term, ij, allows heuristic attention to coherence (10) unique

ie: electricity portfolio interactions

= ij dij.ij.pi .pj

allows exploring different weights on variety, balance, disparity (9)



ij

PORTFOLIO A

gas wind75% 25%


PORTFOLIO A

= ij dij.ij.pi .pj





ie: electricity portfolio interactions `

+

+

gas wind75% 25%


+

+

75% nuclear 25% wind

PORTFOLIO B

value: { A } > value: { B }

= ij dij.ij.pi .pj



PORTFOLIO A



ie: electricity portfolio interactions

gas wind75% 25%

APPRAISE PRIORITIESoperational parameters / strategic criteria

CHARACTERISE DISPARITYattributes / functions / structures

EXPLORE COHERENCEportfolio interactions, systemic

effects

ANALYSE RESULTStrade-offs, sensitivities, regularities, conditions

Mapping Relations between Diversity and Priorities

criteria of cultural characteristics

a

b

c

Deriving Structures of Cultural Disparity

Any multivariate dataset can be normalised to yield a disparity space

In other words: existing statistics give disparity information for free – eg:

criteria of policy priority

criteria of cultural provenance

- non-English literary translations- indigenous literature- derivative literature- translated English literature- non-literary

- cultural quality- cultural protection- cultural promotion- national value added- value for favoured economies- global value added

- gender - age group - ethnic minorities - religion- region - urban / rural - sexual orientation - nationality

da,b db,c

increasing disparity distance, d

similar options linked at low

values of dsim

ilar options linked

Stylised Example: Disparity in Publishing

Detailed multicriteria diversity analysis reveals structure of energy diversity

national popular biography national popular history

national popular crimenational popular mystery

national popular romancenational other

national literary biography national literary history

national contemporary literaturenational classical literature

derivatives of national literatureLatin America literaryLatin America popular

African literaryAfrican popular

other non-EnglishSouth Asian literarySouth Asian popular

East Asian literaryEast Asian popular

English literary translations Engish translated popular

fiction Engish translated documentary

d

Conventional ‘Category Counting’

Treats each named category as equally diverse












national popular

national biography / history

national literary

foreign translations

English translationsd

Subjective Aggregation of Publishing Disparity

Open to manipulation by expedient category aggregation – eg: ‘renewables’

Detailed multicriteria diversity analysis reveals structure of disparities

d

national popular fiction

national literary fiction

foreign translations

English translations

foreign derivatives of national literature

Systematic Picture of Publishing Disparity












Seek best diversity / priority trade-off over all possible portfolios

under each particular perspective (eg: for three elements)

value attached to

cultural diversity

value attached to other cultural priorities

(indigenous expression, economic value)

Mapping Cultural Diversity and Policy Priorities

dominant portfolios lie on this boundary

diversity

priority

Mapping Diversity against Priorities

Seek best diversity / priority trade-off over all possible portfolios

under each particular perspective (eg: for three elements)

Identifies ‘surface’ of preferable diverse mixes for each perspective

without assuming any particular form to diversity / priority trade-off

100%

portfolio

contribution

0%

heuristic

‘conditional optimisation’

max priorities trade-off max diversity

– each perspective / dataset treated separately

– allows exploration of sensitivities / perspectives

Schematic Results

Exploring Sensitivities

heuristic framework for analysis and reflexive deliberation

catalyst for a more open, accessible politics of diversity

XY

Z

include different viewpoints

Conclusions

Many reasons for social / cultural / economic / technical diversity

But … cultural diversity also presents economic and political challenges

Nature of cultural diversity and desirable degree are inherently subjective

Three properties: variety, balance and especially disparity offer framework

This yields a flexible heuristic to explore perspectives & trade-offs

= ij dij.pi.pj

Avoids contingencies of simply counting arbitrary categories

Aids more systematic, transparent and accountable ‘democracy of diversity’

Allows exploration / representation of relations and conditions linking cultural diversity and other cultural policy priorities

Technology

Andy Stirling on Measuring Cultural Diversity