Reparations for Indigenous PeoplesInternational and Comparative Perspectives

Lenzerini, Federico

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199235605.001.0001

Cited by 49 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…43 The HRS does not identify Indigenous individuals (eg, Native American, Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian) who, like Black individuals, have a well-founded claim to reparations and markedly reduced longevity. 44 The small number of Black participants in upper wealth deciles precluded using Black-specific survival models to derive our estimates of the effects of reparations, requiring the use of regression coefficients derived from our entire population. If, as some suggest, higher JAMA Network Open | Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion socioeconomic status results in fewer health benefits for Black individuals than for White individuals, the survival benefits of reparations could be lower than we project.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association Between Racial Wealth Inequities and Racial Disparities in Longevity Among US Adults and Role of Reparations Payments, 1992 to 2018

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceIn the US, Black individuals die younger than White individuals and have less household wealth, a legacy of slavery, ongoing discrimination, and discriminatory public policies. The role of wealth inequality in mediating racial health inequities is unclear.ObjectiveTo assess the contribution of wealth inequities to the longevity gap that exists between Black and White individuals in the US and to model the potential effects of reparations payments on this gap.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study analyzed the association between wealth and survival among participants in the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative panel study of community-dwelling noninstitutionalized US adults 50 years or older that assessed data collected from April 1992 to July 2019. Participants included 7339 non-Hispanic Black (hereinafter Black) and 26 162 non-Hispanic White (hereinafter White) respondents. Data were analyzed from January 1 to September 17, 2022.ExposuresHousehold wealth, the sum of all assets (including real estate, vehicles, and investments), minus the value of debts.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was all-cause mortality by the end of survey follow-up in 2018. Using parametric survival models, the associations among household wealth, race, and survival were evaluated, adjusting for age, sex, number of household members, and marital status. Additional models controlled for educational level and income. The survival effects of eliminating the current mean wealth gap with reparations payments ($828 055 per household) were simulated.ResultsOf the 33 501 individuals in the sample, a weighted 50.1% were women, and weighted mean (SD) age at study entry was 59.3 (11.1) years. Black participants’ median life expectancy was 77.5 (95% CI, 77.0-78.2) years, 4 years shorter than the median life expectancy for White participants (81.5 [95% CI, 81.2-81.8] years). Adjusting for demographic variables, Black participants had a hazard ratio for death of 1.26 (95% CI, 1.18-1.34) compared with White participants. After adjusting for differences in wealth, survival did not differ significantly by race (hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.92-1.08]). In simulations, reparations to close the mean racial wealth gap were associated with reductions in the longevity gap by 65.0% to 102.5%.Conclusions and RelevanceThe findings of this cohort study suggest that differences in wealth are associated with the longevity gap that exists between Black and White individuals in the US. Reparations payments to eliminate the racial wealth gap might substantially narrow racial inequities in mortality.

show abstract

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association Between Racial Wealth Inequities and Racial Disparities in Longevity Among US Adults and Role of Reparations Payments, 1992 to 2018

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…‘Reparation’ is a historically grounded mechanism by which offending parties symbolically and materially mend wrongdoings enacted against individuals and groups (Torpey, 2006). Reparations have been assigned in the context of war (Lu, 2017; Young, 2010), in acknowledgement of and apology for acts of colonialism (Gunstone, 2016; Lenzerini, 2008), and they remain a point of mobilization for Black civil rights activists in the United States, demanding material recompense for the multigenerational damages of slavery and segregation (Bittker, 2018 [1972]; Coates, 2014; Henry, 2009). Reparative acts are not just backward-looking, but also proactive, aiming to address the way historical wrongdoings affect current and future opportunity structures by channeling resources to make up for and overcome existing deficits.…”

Section: Algorithmic Reparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Algorithmic reparation

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Machine learning algorithms pervade contemporary society. They are integral to social institutions, inform processes of governance, and animate the mundane technologies of daily life. Consistently, the outcomes of machine learning reflect, reproduce, and amplify structural inequalities. The field of fair machine learning has emerged in response, developing mathematical techniques that increase fairness based on anti-classification, classification parity, and calibration standards. In practice, these computational correctives invariably fall short, operating from an algorithmic idealism that does not, and cannot, address systemic, Intersectional stratifications. Taking present fair machine learning methods as our point of departure, we suggest instead the notion and practice of algorithmic reparation. Rooted in theories of Intersectionality, reparative algorithms name, unmask, and undo allocative and representational harms as they materialize (American English sp) in sociotechnical form. We propose algorithmic reparation as a foundation for building, evaluating, adjusting, and when necessary, omitting and eradicating machine learning systems.

show abstract

“…However, there has been little analysis of the legal regime for reparations for the destruction of cultural heritage. There is growing attention to reparations for indigenous people and their culture (Lenzerini 2008;Article 11(2), United Nations 2007); but not in terms of conflict related destruction and post-conflict transitions (Vrdoljak 2008;2011). Most of the literature on cultural property focuses on its destruction in armed conflict and the current PPP legal regime (Cunliffe et al 2016;O'Keefe 2006;Woodhead 2014), reflecting a property law focus in response to the mass looting of art and other cultural property during the Second World War, and neglecting the destruction of immoveable and intangible cultural heritage and its impact on communities, groups and peoples.…”

Section: Reparations?mentioning

confidence: 99%