Equity in Action: Concrete Strategies for a Better Future

Misconceptions about what advocates mean by equity shouldn't become a distraction from making transformative changes in our economy and democracy that ultimately benefit everyone.

It is very strategic for the Biden administration to have prioritized equity in the design and implementation of large-scale federal investments. But what impressed me the most is how concrete the administration has been about what they mean by the term equity as defined in a handful of principles.

A commitment to equity shouldn't be politicized or cast purely in moral terms. Equity is a superior strategy for broad-based growth. Equity isn't just about race and ethnicity or gender but it is about rural vs urban, about income and wealth and sometimes the intersections between multiple of these. 

A friend Angela Glover Blackwell coined the idea of the ‘Curb-Cut Effect’ to describe how strategic equity is in the shared interest of the nation as a whole saying, 

“Everyone benefits in a society experiencing the Curb-Cut Effect. First documented as the response to the advocacy of people in wheelchairs, these sidewalk indentations turned out to benefit many:  those pulling suitcases on wheels, pushing babies and young children in strollers, bikers, workers with large racks making deliveries, and many others.  The Curb-Cut Effect is a vibrant illustration of how laws and programs designed to benefit vulnerable groups, such as the disabled or people of color, often end up benefiting all. That creation underscores a foundational belief: we are one nation, we rise or fall together.”

I think that one of the challenges is that there is a conversation happening about issues of [insert here] in academic settings and the media that is often prone to abstraction. I have not worked in academic research or in media but the way I experience the conversations about equity is that they are focused on provoking strong thought or emotion but are light on specific solutions to real-world problems.

I personally am more energized by the prospects of finding solutions to specific  disparities in specific geographies, with specific populations and in specific sectors of the economy than making general moral claims. One reason I enjoy working on broadband expansion is that the National Telecommunications and Information Administration has provided a list of 'covered populations' that includes a wide range of communities disadvantaged by the status quo. 

For example, we know that the evidence shows Black low income communities in the rural South pay more money for less quality internet. Equity to me is about performing a root cause analysis as to why this is the case and designing strategies to address it. Whatever language we use to describe the accurate diagnosis problem and specific solutions to address the problem is sufficient for me. I imagine that most elected officials irrespective of party affiliation in the South would likely agree on the substance. 

I personally am not interested in nor do I have the energy for abstract debates on this or other topics. I find the term equity only helpful as an analytical category for both diagnosing concrete patterns of regional, economic and social disparity and developing concrete solutions to address them. This is important because reducing these disparities are critical to our most important national goals from addressing workforce shortages in critical technology areas to the clean energy transition and competing in the digital economy.

I've been frustrated by the lack of analytical and strategic depth in many cases by the loudest voices in the debate about equity on both sides including the side I agree with. I also think there are powerful monied interests seeking to sow division and confusion around this issue for their own selfish ends. 

But most people in the U.S. are going about their daily lives seeking a better one. They understand the 'curb side effect' intuitively and support concrete solutions. There is no simple technocratic fix for the problems that we face without deep community engagement and community ownership. That requires buy-in from people and a commitment to seizing this once in a generation opportunity for equity in our economy and democracy.