Most research on employment gender inequality focuses on differences between men and women, reinforcing a binary conception of gender. This study uses the National Transgender Discrimination Survey to evaluate the employment outcomes of nonbinary transgender people (those who identify as a gender other than man or woman). The results of this study suggest that being out as a nonbinary transgender person negatively affects nonbinary transgender people's employment outcomes. Though all transgender people have higher unemployment rates than the general population, outness has different effects on nonbinary transgender people based on sex assigned at birth, with those assigned male at birth tending to be discriminated against in hiring but those assigned female at birth more likely to experience differential treatment once hired. Race also contributes to differential treatment in the workplace. In an additional comparison between all transgender groups, I find that transgender women tend to have worse employment experiences than nonbinary transgender people and transgender men, the latter two tending to have similar outcomes.

Cette thèse porte sur la dynamique des inégalités de revenu et de pollution entre individus, à l’intérieur des pays et au niveau mondial. Plus précisément, l'objectif de ces travaux est de mieux mesurer et mieux comprendre les déterminants de la dynamique sur moyen ou long terme des inégalités de revenu à l'échelle d’un pays (chapitre I) ou au niveau mondial (chapitre II). Il s'agit également de mieux comprendre et mesurer les liens articulant les inégalités de revenu aux inégalités environnementales au niveau national (chapitre III) et mondial (chapitre IV). Enfin, la thèse discute de l’impact des indicateurs de mesure des inégalités sur l'action politique (chapitres V et VI). / Chapter I, entitled “Indian income inequality dynamics, 1922-2015: From British Raj to Billionaire Raj?” , discusses the methodological issues at stake when reconstructing historical income inequality series in a country as populated as India, but with very scarce data. The chapter shows that despite many important data limitations, one can combine tax data, surveys and national accounts in a systematic manner to reconstruct income inequality estimates robust to a wide range of alternative strategies. In the case of India, the results are striking as they reveal that income inequality is currently at its highest level since the creation of the Indian Income tax in 1922. The top 1% capture more than 22% of national income today, up from 6% in the mid-1980s, when the top 1% captured about 6% of total income. Chapter II, entitled “Building a global income distribution brick by brick” , builds on chapter I (and many other similar endeavors carried out by my colleagues at the WIL) to construct a global distribution of income based on a systematic combination of tax, survey data and national accounts. Our results are notable as some go against preconceived ideas on globalization and its impacts on economic inequality. In particular, we show that the global top 1% captured twice as much global income growth as the bottom 50% since 1980. We demonstrate that inequality increased, rather than decreased between world individuals since 1980, despite strong growth in the emerging world. In other words, rising inequality within countries was stronger than the effect of reduced inequality between countries since 1980. Looking into the future, the chapter also reveals that under “Business as Usual”, global inequality is likely to further rise (despite strong growth in emerging regions) contrary to what has been argued in academic and public debates on the matter. The Appendices to the chapter present the details of the method and reveal that our results are robust alternative strategies to account for missing data at the country level.How to move from global income inequality to global environmental inequality? A first step is to understand the role of income and non-income drivers of individual pollution levels within countries. This is the work that is discussed in Chapter III, entitled “Are younger generations higher carbon emitters than their elders?” , which focuses on the determinants of individual level CO2 emissions and focus on the role of income, technology and other factors, such as date of birth. We show that the French baby-boom generation emitted relatively more CO2 than their parents and their children, throughout their lifetime (about 20% more direct CO2 emissions). This is due to a combination of income, technological lock-in and cultural effects. Chapter IV, entitled “Carbon and inequality: From Kyoto to Paris” , builds on the results obtained in the previous chapters to construct a global distribution of carbon emissions. At the time of writing this chapter, global income inequality estimates presented in Chapter II were not available, so we had to rely on work done by other researchers to obtain global income series (Lakner and Milanovic, 2015). These were corrected with tax data and then used to reconstruct a global carbon emissions database. We show that the top 10% emitters account for about 45% of global emissions today and that twenty years ago, global inequality of carbon emissions was essentially a between-country inequality phenomena. Today, the situation is being reversed as within-country emissions inequality accounts for as much of global emissions inequality as the between-country dimension. On the basis of our results, we propose schemes to better share contributions to climate adaptation funds. The history of climate negotiations shows the extreme difficulty to implement any kinds of allocation rules to share a climate burden.

Tsirelson's bound is the upper bound for a Bell inequality which is valid for all quantum mechanical systems. We discuss why Tsirelson's bound was developed by looking at some historical arguments in quantum physics, such as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox, an argument for the quantum mechanical description of physical reality being incomplete, and local hidden variables. We present the counterargument to those theories, Bell's inequality, which later expanded to include any inequality that a local system fulfills, but that an entangled quantum system can violate. We present the proof of two specific Bell inequalities: the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality and the I3322 inequality. Then the Tsirelson's bound for the CHSH inequality is proven with a simple system of two entangled spin-1/2 particles and with a general argument that is valid for all entangled systems. We give the upper quantum bound for the generalized CHSH inequality, which describes the situation that we have more than two measurement options, by using semidefinite programming. We prove the Tsirelson's bound for the I3322 inequality by using maximally entangled systems and semidefinite programming. Finally, we discuss the upper bounds that are obtained from these different methods. / Tsirelson's gräns är den övre gränsen till en Bell olikhet som är giltig för alla kvantmekaniska system. Vi diskuterar varför Tsirelson's gräns togs fram genom att titta på histroiska argument i kvantfysik, så som Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradoxen, ett argument som säger att den kvantmekaniska beskrivningen av den fysikaliska verkligheten är offulständig, och lokala gömda variabler. Vi presenterar motargumentet till dessa teorier, Bell's olikheter, som senare generaliserades för att betyda alla olikheter som lokala system uppfyller, men som ett system i kvantsammanflättning kan bryta. Vi presenterar beviset för två specifika Bell olikheter: CHSH olikheten och I3322 olikheten. Sedan bevisas Tsirelson's gräns för CHSH olikheten med ett enkelt system av två sammanflättade spin-1/2 partiklar och ett generellt argument som stämmer för alla sammanflättade system. Vi ger den övre kvant gränsen för den generaliserade Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) olikheten, som beskriver situationen då vi har flera valmöjligheter för mätningar, genom att använda semidefinit programmering. Vi bevisar Tsirelson's gräns för I3322 olikheten genom att använda maximalt sammanflättade system och semidefinit programmering. Till slut diskuterar vi de övre gränserna som har erhållits ifrån de olika metoderna.

This study examines the role of mother's health and socioeconomic status on daughter's self-rated health using data spanning three decades from the National Longitudinal Surveys of Mature Women and Young Women (N = 1,848 matched mother-daughter pairs; 1,201 White and 647 African American). Using nested growth curve models, we investigated whether mother's self-rated health affected the daughter's self-rated health and whether socioeconomic status mediated this relationship. Mother's health significantly influenced daughters' self-rated health, but the findings were mediated by mother's socioeconomic status. African American daughters reported lower self-rated health and experienced more decline over time compared with White daughters, accounting for mother's and daughter's covariates. Our findings reveal maternal health and resources as a significant predictor of daughters' self-rated health and confirm the role of socioeconomic status and racial disparities over time.

<p>Integralne nejednakosti Jensena i Čebiševa<br />uopštene su za integrale bazirane na neaditivnim<br />merama. Prvo uopštenje dokazano je za<br />pseudo-integral skupovno-vrednosne&nbsp; funkcije, a<br />drugo za pseudo-integral realno-vrednosne funkcije<br />u odnosu na intervalno-vrednosnu -meru.<br />Dokazana je i uopštena nejednakost Čebiševa<br />za pseudo-integral realno-vrednosne&nbsp; funkcije i<br />njena dva intervalno-vrednosna oblika. Nejednakost<br />Jensena je primenjena u principu premije, a<br />nejednakost Čebiševa na procenu verovatnoće.</p> / <p>Integral inequalities of Jensen and Chebyshev type are<br />generalized for integrals based on nonadditive measures.<br />The first generalization is proven for the pseudointegral<br />of a set valued function and the second one<br />for the pseudo-integral of a real-valued function with<br />respect to the interval-valued -measure. Generalized<br />Chebyshev inequality for the pseudo-integral of a realvalued<br />function and its two interval-valued forms are<br />proven. Jensen inequality is applied in the premium<br />principle and Chebyshev inequality is applied to the<br />probability estimation.</p>

No description available.

Thesis advisor: Arthur Lewbel / This thesis consists of two chapters. In Chapter 1, I studied the consumption inequalities between men and women, as well as boys and girls, within the households in Sierra Leone. Through a collective household model, I found that women on average experience lower levels of consumption than men, with the inequality concentrated in households that are large or consist of more women than men. Moreover, there is little evidence of overall consumption inequality by gender for children, while both boys and girls have very high poverty rates. In addition, I developed a new strategy for understanding who is perceived as a child vs. an adult in a household, which improved the estimation. In Chapter 2, I studied the associations between sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes and adolescent obesity in the US. I found that the taxes were associated with a lower body mass index and a lower probability of being overweight or obese. I found that SSBs and milk consumption had mediating roles, as tax increases were associated with decreases in SSB consumption and increases in milk consumption. Given the limited implementation and recent preemption of SSB taxes across the US, these results would help in understanding the potential benefits of implementing SSB taxes on a larger scale. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2023. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Economics.

Research on attitudes towards immigration policies typically considers the economic and cultural threats that compel many Americans to favor exclusionary policies that curb immigration. Less is understood about how indifference to inequality shapes Americans’ attitudes towards immigration policies—that is, how ‘not caring’ about the unequal conditions faced by immigrants likely has detrimental consequences for their safety and wellbeing. The present research examines indifference to inequality as a predictor for policies that impact opportunities for immigrants to come to the U.S., and who are otherwise undocumented and/or at great risk for exploitation. Using survey data from the American National Election Studies gathered in 2016 (Study 1; n = 3,187) and 2020 (Study 2; n = 6,941), we find that greater indifference to inequality is associated with less support for providing a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and greater support for building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico, independently of other explanatory intergroup variables (e.g., prejudice, threat, and demographic characteristics). However, these associations tend to be moderated by ethnoracial background, such that although indifference to inequality predicts immigration policy attitudes among U.S.-born White Americans, it is not predictive of attitudes among U.S.-born Latino and Black Americans. Furthermore, these associations are not moderated by recent family history of immigration, suggesting that respondents’ group status in the U.S. ethnoracial hierarchy, and not the personal relevance of immigration, may well be driving these associations.

No description available.

No description available.