The Dynamics of Knowledge: Their Input to a World with more Equity

Universitas Psychologica, vol. 17, núm. 2, 2018

Pontificia Universidad Javeriana

Wilson López López

Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Colombia

Inequity in the world is a problem of crescent and complex repercussions in social problems such as violence, health and social mobility, between others. As Wilkilson and Picket (2009) have shown on their exhaustive analyses of inequity, an important part of the world population is in conditions in which the access to quality education and to knowledge is null, and the number of countries with inequity increases.

In the diverse approximations to the consequences and related variables of inequity; often, the problems derived from the breaches created by the difficulties to access to knowledge are not included. Contexts with more inequity make perverse dynamics; let us examine some of them.

Dynamic 1. Countries with more inequity increase the costs of knowledge production preventing societies from access to it.

Dynamic 2. Countries with more economic inequity have more costs to scientific communications so their population cannot access to the produced knowledge.

Dynamic 3. Countries with more economic inequity considerably increase the breach between who can access to knowledge and who cannot.

Dynamic 4. The costs of access to knowledge in countries with more inequity are higher than in the ones with less inequity.

Dynamic 5. Countries with more inequity have less scientific and technologic development.

Dynamic 6. Countries with more inequity and with less development are more expensive in terms of production and communication.

It is evident that some of this perverse dynamics unfortunately are deepen by the institutional designs that do not facilitate these circuits rupture, contributing in this way to fathom inequity. These problematics of knowledge must be discussed, they must be elucidated, and finally, they must be transformed in order not to contribute to the perverse and apparently inevitable path to inequity.

The institutional designs mentioned before, use systems of measure and incentives that in poor countries with high inequity levels only increase this last one. Thus, the few efforts to discuss the problems related to the consequences of scientific dynamics policies and their effect on inequity are critic.

It is clear that countries with deep inequities, looking for being part of organizations like OCDE, are not able to assume without precautions the practices of countries that have years of hoarding, wealth, infrastructure and knowledge, and additionally, have less inequity. To seek to compete with these countries is wrongful and certainly, it will not allow promoting and strengthening our precarious communities; surely, it will increase inequity, which without doubt will lead to perpetuate the social, politic and economic problems that Wilkinson and Picket (2009) and Piketty (2014) have documented exhaustedly.

All these lead to conclude that to discuss the economic policy of knowledge management processes from a perspective of inequity, can contribute to a critic look to the policies about the dynamics of science and technology of our countries that are being adopted by the decision actors.


Piketty, T. (2014). El capital en el siglo XXI. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). Desigualdad: un análisis de la (in) felicidad colectiva. Madrid: Turner Publicaciones SL.