To perform its fundamental functions, government must pay closer attention to the interdependence of efficiency, effectiveness, and equity. Equity means ensuring that all individuals and communities have fair and equal access to public services, regardless of their socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, gender, or other factors. It involves recognizing and addressing systemic disparities that hinder certain groups from fully benefiting from government programs and services.
Equity is closely tied to effectiveness, which measures how well a policy or program achieves its intended goals and outcomes. A program that fails to reach the entirety of its target population cannot be considered effective. Likewise, achieving efficiency — maximizing outputs or program benefits relative to the resources used — won’t be possible if segments of the population remain underserved. Moreover, the inequitable distribution of resources is likely to have costly downstream effects. Like our triple-stranded DNA that carries life’s essential code, the three E’s together form the fundamental building blocks of a high-performance government organization.
Although equity has long been considered a pillar of public administration, local governments often fail to consider it in designing and implementing programs. There’s a tendency to look at diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives as merely a “nice to have,” or as a virtue-signaling feature of so-called “woke” culture. But that misses the point: As the National Academy of Public Administration stated more than 20 years ago, disparities along racial, gender, socioeconomic levels, and, increasingly, digital access “not only harm the individuals and families who directly experience them but also impose substantial and increasing costs on the overall economy and society.”
Marginalization and disparity incur costs on society by deploying resources ineffectively and therefore using them inefficiently. A report by McKinsey, for example, projects that by 2030 the world could be missing out on $10 trillion in annual economic value — the equivalent of Japan’s GDP — by not investing in educating girls. Closing the digital gender divide is especially crucial for low- and middle-income countries, as it could save an estimated $500 billion over the next five years. Gender inequality affects economic growth and every aspect of sustainable development. Government policies that pay simultaneous attention to equity, effectiveness, and efficiency will be able to create policies and programs that are just, impactful, and resource-efficient.
The Case for Equity in Government
Making policy decisions incorporating equity also requires acknowledging that governments have played a key role in creating and perpetuating social inequities and that they can choose to mitigate their effects and fix systemic disparities. Pursuing equity isn’t just a measure of altruism. It benefits government in the following important ways:
It builds public trust
The public’s confidence is at an all-time low. Since 2007, the Pew Research Center reports, trust in American government has stayed below 30 percent. After the murder of George Floyd in 2020, along with the extrajudicial killings of several Black individuals while in police custody, the public’s faith in law enforcement plummeted to 48% for the first time in 27 years. Despite a slight uptick in 2021 to 51 percent, faith in the police again dropped in 2022 to a record low of 43 percent, and has yet to fully return to pre-pandemic levels. To the dismay and frustration of public servants everywhere, the erosion of trust in institutions at large has severely constrained governments’ ability to do their job. Demonstrating a willingness to address systemic inequalities and injustices, such as disparities in policing practices among various communities, can help rebuild trust, reduce social tensions and conflicts, and re-engage citizens.
It maximizes use of resources and improves overall government performance
In San Diego, a deadly outbreak of Hepatitis A infected 592 people and killed 20 between March 2017 and October 2018. While the majority of cases consisted of those who were homeless, consumed illicit drugs, or both, 28 percent of the cases were neither of those. A San Diego State associate professor commented at the time that access to more public restrooms was key to ending the outbreak, calling them “literally lifesaving facilities.” Among the lessons learned was the need to improve access to sanitation facilities. By improving those services, San Diego was able to better contain a second Hepatitis A outbreak in 2023, limiting it to 43 cases.
It improves policy outcomes
Incorporating equity into decision-making processes means engaging with diverse communities to generate policies that are more responsive to all residents’ needs. Designing policies based on the diverse lived experiences of residents will result in more effective, targeted and tailored interventions. For example, examining the question “Is Crime Widespread?” researchers with the International City/County Management Association found that crime tends to be localized — concentrated around certain addresses, land parcels, homes or businesses — rather than encompassing whole neighborhoods. Thus, deploying police across entire neighborhoods was ineffective and costly, and unnecessarily antagonized residents. By zeroing in on the small fraction of addresses that experience most of the crime, resources can be sent where they are actually needed, leading to more efficient use of public funds and better outcomes for impacted communities.
It improves service delivery
Understanding the differences in the way different populations experience government systems and services can provide policymakers and implementers with important insights to make government work better for the people. In Multnomah County, Oregon, for example, the Common Application program was designed to streamline access to public assistance by allowing residents to apply for multiple benefits through a single application. Additionally, offering support in 68 languages ensured accessibility for residents. This approach both reduced administrative burdens and enhanced service delivery for underserved populations. It exceeded program goals and demonstrated how tailored policies can promote equity while improving efficiency and outcomes.
Community conditions are co-created between residents and governments. As nations become more diverse, and as economic, social, and environmental impacts (to list just a few) tend to widen disparities, governments must be more intentional about integrating efficiency, effectiveness and equity into their operations and decision-making. It’s a vital step to strengthening social cohesion and building community resilience. Take it from an auditor who has done the math on this more times than I can count: only by recognizing the interconnectedness of the three E’s can you achieve a high-performing government.