Equality vs. Equity

Introduction: Beyond "Treat Everyone the Same"

In conversations about fairness and justice, two words often appear that seem similar but represent fundamentally different approaches to creating a just society: equality and equity. While these terms are sometimes used interchangeably, understanding their distinction is crucial for anyone who wants to work effectively toward justice and fairness in the real world.

The confusion between equality and equity reflects a deeper tension in how we think about fairness. Should we treat everyone exactly the same, or should we take into account people's different circumstances and needs? Is it more fair to give everyone identical resources, or to give people what they specifically need to succeed? These questions don't have simple answers, but they are central to creating policies, institutions, and relationships that truly serve justice.

This distinction has profound implications for education policy, healthcare systems, workplace practices, criminal justice, economic development, and virtually every other area where fairness matters. Understanding when to apply equality and when to pursue equity – and how to balance them when they conflict – is one of the most important skills for creating a more just world.

Defining Equality: The Foundation of Fair Treatment

Equality, at its core, means treating people the same way regardless of their individual characteristics or circumstances. It emphasizes uniform treatment, identical opportunities, and consistent application of rules and standards. Equality asks: "Are we giving everyone the same thing?"

The Power of Equal Treatment

Equality has tremendous moral and practical power. It embodies the principle that all people have equal worth and dignity, and therefore deserve equal consideration and respect. This principle has been fundamental to movements for civil rights, women's rights, and human rights around the world.

Consider the principle of "one person, one vote" in democratic systems. This represents equality in its purest form – every citizen, regardless of wealth, education, race, or any other characteristic, gets exactly the same political power to choose their representatives. This equality of voting rights is considered fundamental to democratic legitimacy because it treats all citizens as having equal worth and equal stake in their society's decisions.

Equal treatment under the law is another cornerstone of justice systems around the world. The principle that laws apply equally to everyone – that no one is above the law and that similar cases should be treated similarly – helps ensure that justice is not arbitrary or discriminatory. When courts treat similar cases differently based on irrelevant characteristics like race or class, we recognize this as a violation of justice.

Formal vs. Substantive Equality

However, equality itself comes in different forms. Formal equality means applying the same rules to everyone. If a school has a rule that all students must pass a reading test to advance to the next grade, formal equality means applying this requirement to every student without exception.

Substantive equality goes deeper, asking whether formally equal treatment produces genuinely equal outcomes or opportunities. If some students come from homes where English is not spoken, or where there are fewer books, applying the same reading requirement might not give all students an equal chance to succeed, even though the rule is applied equally.

This distinction helps explain why equality can sometimes feel insufficient or even unfair. When people start from very different places, treating them identically may not give them genuinely equal opportunities to succeed.

The Limitations of Pure Equality

While equality is powerful and important, it has limitations when applied in isolation. Pure equality can ignore relevant differences between people's circumstances, needs, and starting points. It can perpetuate existing disadvantages by treating unequal situations as if they were equal.

Consider a simple example: a company policy that provides the same health insurance to all employees. This represents equality – everyone gets identical coverage. However, employees with chronic health conditions or large families might need different coverage than young, healthy employees. Treating everyone exactly the same might not meet everyone's actual health needs.

Similarly, if a school provides the same resources to all students, it's treating them equally. But students who come to school hungry, who don't have quiet places to study at home, or who are learning in a second language might need additional support to have genuinely equal opportunities to learn and succeed.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread." - Anatole France

This famous satirical quote illustrates how formal equality can sometimes mask substantive inequality. Technically, laws against begging apply equally to rich and poor. But in practice, they affect only those who are desperate enough to beg – highlighting how equal treatment can have very unequal impacts.

Understanding Equity: Fairness Through Differentiation

Equity takes a different approach to fairness. Instead of treating everyone identically, equity focuses on giving people what they need to achieve fair outcomes. Equity asks: "What does each person need to succeed?" and "How can we ensure everyone has a genuine opportunity to thrive?"

The Logic of Equitable Treatment

Equity recognizes that people start from different places, face different challenges, and have different needs. To achieve fair outcomes, it may be necessary to provide different levels of support, resources, or accommodation. The goal is not identical treatment but rather ensuring that everyone has a genuine opportunity to succeed.

A classic illustration involves three people of different heights trying to watch a baseball game over a fence. Equality would give each person an identical box to stand on. But if the people are different heights, some might still not be able to see over the fence while others can see easily. Equity would give shorter people bigger boxes and taller people smaller boxes (or no box at all) so that everyone can see the game.

In educational settings, equity might mean providing additional tutoring for students who are struggling, offering English language support for non-native speakers, or ensuring that students with disabilities have the accommodations they need to participate fully in learning. The goal is not to give everyone identical resources, but to ensure everyone has what they need to learn and succeed.

Recognizing Systemic Disadvantages

Equity often involves recognizing and addressing systemic disadvantages – patterns of discrimination, exclusion, or resource inequality that affect entire groups of people. These systemic issues mean that treating everyone identically may actually perpetuate unfairness rather than correcting it.

For example, if women have historically been excluded from certain professions, simply removing formal barriers (equality) might not be sufficient to achieve genuine opportunity. Women might still face informal discrimination, lack of mentorship networks, or workplace cultures that are unwelcoming. Achieving equity might require active efforts to recruit women, provide mentorship programs, or change workplace practices to be more inclusive.

Similarly, if certain communities have been disinvested in for decades – lacking quality schools, healthcare facilities, or economic opportunities – providing the same level of public investment as more affluent communities (equality) might not be sufficient to address the accumulated disadvantage. Equity might require higher levels of investment to help disadvantaged communities catch up.

Individual Needs and Accommodations

Equity also operates at the individual level, recognizing that people have different abilities, circumstances, and needs that may require different accommodations or support. The disability rights movement has been particularly important in developing frameworks for equitable treatment that goes beyond identical treatment.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in the United States, for example, requires "reasonable accommodations" for people with disabilities. This might mean providing sign language interpreters for deaf employees, making buildings wheelchair accessible, or allowing flexible work schedules for people with certain medical conditions. These accommodations don't give people with disabilities "more" than others – they level the playing field so that people with disabilities can participate equally.

This principle extends beyond disability. Equity in the workplace might involve flexible scheduling for parents, cultural accommodations for religious practices, or additional training opportunities for workers who lack certain educational backgrounds. The goal is to ensure that people's different circumstances don't prevent them from having fair opportunities to succeed.

The Relationship Between Equality and Equity

Rather than being opposites, equality and equity are complementary approaches to fairness that serve different purposes and are appropriate in different contexts. Understanding when to apply each approach – and how to balance them when they conflict – is crucial for effective justice work.

When Equality is Essential

Equality is most important when we're dealing with fundamental rights and dignity, legal processes, and situations where differential treatment could lead to discrimination or bias. Some areas where equality should generally take precedence include:

Legal and Political Rights: Voting rights, freedom of speech, due process protections, and other fundamental rights should generally be equal for all people. Differential treatment in these areas can undermine democratic legitimacy and human dignity.

Basic Respect and Dignity: All people deserve equal respect and consideration as human beings. This doesn't mean treating everyone identically in all contexts, but it does mean recognizing everyone's equal worth and dignity.

Procedural Fairness: Fair processes – such as hiring procedures, admissions criteria, or judicial proceedings – should generally apply the same standards to everyone. When processes treat similar cases differently without justification, they violate principles of fairness and can perpetuate bias.

Protection from Discrimination: Anti-discrimination laws typically emphasize equal treatment, prohibiting different treatment based on characteristics like race, gender, religion, or other protected categories. These equality protections are essential for preventing arbitrary discrimination.

When Equity is Necessary

Equity becomes necessary when equal treatment would not produce fair outcomes, when people face systemic disadvantages, or when individual differences require accommodation. Some areas where equity approaches are often needed include:

Education and Development: Students come to school with very different backgrounds, resources, and needs. Providing identical education to all students might not give everyone equal opportunities to learn and succeed. Equity might require additional support for struggling students, English language learners, or students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Healthcare and Social Services: People have different health needs, family circumstances, and vulnerabilities. Equal healthcare might mean everyone gets the same basic services, but equity ensures that people get the specific care and support they need.

Economic Development: Communities and individuals start from very different economic positions. Equal economic policies might treat all communities the same, but equity recognizes that disadvantaged communities might need additional investment and support to have genuine opportunities for economic development.

Workplace Inclusion: While equal opportunity employment is important, creating truly inclusive workplaces often requires equity – accommodating different needs, providing mentorship and development opportunities for underrepresented groups, and addressing barriers that prevent full participation.

Navigating Tensions Between Equality and Equity

Sometimes equality and equity can come into tension with each other. Pure equality might seem to conflict with equitable treatment, and equity measures might appear to violate equality principles. Navigating these tensions requires careful consideration of goals, contexts, and values.

Consider college admissions policies that take race or socioeconomic status into account. From an equality perspective, this might seem unfair – it treats applicants differently based on characteristics beyond their control. From an equity perspective, it might be necessary to address ongoing effects of discrimination and provide genuine opportunities for students from underrepresented backgrounds.

These tensions don't have easy answers, but they can be navigated more effectively by being clear about goals, transparent about reasoning, and committed to both fairness and effectiveness. Some principles that can help include:

Clarity about Objectives: What are we trying to achieve? Are we focused on equal treatment, equal opportunity, equal outcomes, or some combination? Being clear about goals helps determine when equality or equity approaches are more appropriate.

Proportionality: Equity measures should be proportionate to the problems they're trying to address. The more significant the disadvantage or barrier, the more differential treatment might be justified to achieve fair outcomes.

Transparency and Justification: When providing differential treatment, it's important to be transparent about why this is necessary and how it serves fairness rather than arbitrary favoritism.

Temporal Considerations: Equity measures are often temporary responses to address historical disadvantages or current barriers. As these barriers are removed and disadvantages addressed, the need for differential treatment should diminish.

Real-World Applications: Case Studies in Equality and Equity

Understanding how equality and equity work in practice requires examining specific contexts where these principles are applied. Let's explore several areas where the distinction between equality and equity has significant practical implications.

Education: From Equal Schools to Equitable Learning

Education provides perhaps the clearest examples of both the power and limitations of equality approaches, and the necessity of equity thinking for achieving genuine fairness.

The Equality Approach: Much educational reform has focused on equality – ensuring that all schools receive similar funding, that all students follow the same curriculum, and that all students are held to the same standards. The landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision in the United States was fundamentally about equality – ensuring that black and white students had access to the same quality of education.

These equality measures have been crucial for removing formal barriers and discriminatory practices. However, decades of experience have shown that equal treatment alone is not sufficient to ensure that all students have genuine opportunities to succeed.

The Need for Equity: Students come to school with vastly different levels of preparation, family resources, and support systems. Some students arrive at kindergarten already knowing their letters and numbers, while others have never seen a book. Some students have quiet places to study and parents who can help with homework, while others face housing instability, family stress, or language barriers.

Equity in education recognizes these differences and provides additional support where it's needed. This might include:

• Additional funding for schools serving high-poverty communities
• Smaller class sizes in schools where students face more challenges
• Extended learning time and tutoring for students who are behind
• English language support for non-native speakers
• Social and emotional support for students facing trauma or instability
• Special education services for students with disabilities

Balancing Both Approaches: Effective education systems typically combine equality and equity. They ensure that all students have access to quality education and are held to high standards (equality), while providing differentiated support to help all students meet those standards (equity).

Finland's education system is often cited as an example of this balance. All students attend the same type of school through age 16, and standardized testing is minimal (emphasizing equality of experience). However, students who struggle receive extensive additional support, and schools in disadvantaged areas receive extra resources (emphasizing equity of outcomes).

Healthcare: Universal Access and Individual Needs

Healthcare systems around the world grapple with balancing equality and equity in providing care to diverse populations with different health needs and circumstances.

Equality in Healthcare: The equality approach in healthcare focuses on ensuring that all people have equal access to medical care. This might involve universal healthcare systems that provide the same basic coverage to everyone, or anti-discrimination laws that prevent healthcare providers from refusing service based on race, gender, or other characteristics.

The principle that medical care should be based on medical need rather than ability to pay reflects equality thinking – all people should have equal access to life-saving treatment regardless of their economic status.

Equity Considerations: However, different people have different health needs, risk factors, and barriers to accessing care. Equity in healthcare recognizes these differences and provides additional support or services where they're needed.

For example, pregnant women need different healthcare services than elderly men. People with diabetes need ongoing management support that healthy people don't require. Communities with high rates of certain diseases might need additional screening programs or preventive services.

Equity also addresses social determinants of health – the conditions in which people live and work that affect their health outcomes. This might involve:

• Targeted interventions in communities with poor health outcomes
• Cultural competency training for healthcare providers
• Services in multiple languages
• Mobile clinics for rural or underserved areas
• Social services that address housing, nutrition, and other factors that affect health

Challenges and Tensions: Healthcare systems must balance equal access with individualized care, universal coverage with specialized needs, and cost containment with equity concerns. Some treatments are extremely expensive and might not be available to everyone, raising questions about how to balance equality of access with practical resource constraints.

Criminal Justice: Equal Treatment Under Law and Addressing Disparities

Criminal justice systems face particular challenges in balancing equality and equity, as they must ensure equal treatment under law while addressing systemic disparities and individual circumstances.

The Equality Imperative: Equal justice under law is a fundamental principle of legitimate legal systems. This means that similar crimes should receive similar punishments regardless of the defendant's race, class, gender, or other irrelevant characteristics. Laws should be applied consistently, and everyone should receive fair procedures and due process protections.

This equality principle is essential for maintaining public trust in the justice system and ensuring that law serves justice rather than reinforcing existing hierarchies or biases.

Equity Challenges: However, the criminal justice system operates in a context of significant social inequality. People from different backgrounds may face very different consequences for the same legal treatment. For example:

• Wealthy defendants can afford experienced private attorneys, while poor defendants rely on overworked public defenders
• Cash bail systems may keep poor defendants in jail while wealthy defendants go free while awaiting trial
• Criminal records may have more severe employment consequences for people who already face labor market discrimination
• People with mental illness or addiction may need treatment rather than punishment

Equity-Informed Reforms: Many criminal justice reforms attempt to address these disparities while maintaining equal treatment principles. Examples include:

• Drug courts that provide treatment instead of incarceration for people with addiction
• Mental health courts that address underlying mental health issues
• Bail reform that reduces reliance on cash bail
• Sentencing guidelines that account for individual circumstances
• Diversion programs that provide alternatives to prosecution for low-level offenses

These reforms try to ensure that the justice system addresses underlying problems and doesn't simply perpetuate social inequalities, while still maintaining principles of equal treatment and proportional punishment.

Workplace Diversity and Inclusion

Modern workplaces increasingly recognize that creating fair and inclusive environments requires both equality and equity approaches.

Equal Opportunity Employment: Anti-discrimination laws and equal opportunity policies focus on equality – ensuring that hiring, promotion, and workplace treatment don't discriminate based on race, gender, religion, or other protected characteristics. These policies require that similar qualifications and performance receive similar treatment.

Equity and Inclusion Initiatives: However, many organizations have found that equal treatment alone doesn't create genuinely inclusive workplaces or address barriers that prevent full participation by all employees. Equity approaches might include:

• Mentorship programs for underrepresented employees
• Flexible work arrangements that accommodate different family responsibilities
• Leadership development programs for women and minorities
• Accommodations for employees with disabilities
• Cultural competency training for managers
• Employee resource groups that provide support and networking opportunities

Balancing Fairness Concerns: Some employees may view equity initiatives as unfair, arguing that they provide advantages to some groups that aren't available to others. Organizations must carefully communicate the rationale for these programs, ensure they serve legitimate business and fairness purposes, and maintain commitment to treating all employees with respect and dignity.

Cultural and Global Perspectives on Equality and Equity

The balance between equality and equity is understood differently across cultures and societies, reflecting different values, histories, and social contexts. Understanding these differences is important for anyone working on justice issues in diverse or global contexts.

Individualistic vs. Collectivist Approaches

Cultures that emphasize individual rights and personal responsibility may lean more toward equality approaches, focusing on ensuring that all individuals receive equal treatment and have equal opportunities to succeed based on their own efforts and merits.

Cultures that emphasize community welfare and collective responsibility may be more comfortable with equity approaches that provide differential support based on group membership or social position. These cultures may see it as natural and appropriate to provide additional support to community members who face disadvantages.

Neither approach is inherently superior, but understanding these cultural differences is important for developing approaches to justice that can work effectively in different contexts.

Historical Context and Colonial Legacy

Societies with histories of formal discrimination or colonial exploitation may place greater emphasis on equity approaches to address ongoing effects of historical injustice. Countries that have experienced apartheid, colonial domination, or systematic exclusion may see equity measures as necessary for achieving genuine fairness.

Societies with more egalitarian histories may focus more on maintaining equal treatment, viewing differential treatment with suspicion as potentially recreating the kinds of hierarchies they've worked to eliminate.

These different historical experiences shape contemporary debates about fairness and influence which approaches to equality and equity are seen as legitimate and necessary.

Economic Development and Resource Constraints

Wealthier societies may have more resources available to pursue both equality and equity simultaneously, providing universal services while also offering additional support where it's needed. Societies with fewer resources may face starker trade-offs between different approaches to fairness.

In contexts where basic needs aren't met for anyone, equality of access to limited resources might take priority. In contexts where some people's basic needs are met while others' aren't, equity approaches that prioritize those with the greatest needs might be more appropriate.

"Equality is giving everyone a shoe. Equity is giving everyone a shoe that fits." - Anonymous

Contemporary Debates and Challenges

The relationship between equality and equity continues to evolve as societies grapple with new challenges and changing understanding of fairness. Several contemporary debates highlight the ongoing relevance and complexity of these concepts.

Affirmative Action and Preferential Treatment

Perhaps no issue illustrates the tension between equality and equity more clearly than debates over affirmative action policies in education and employment. These policies explicitly provide preferential treatment to members of underrepresented groups, arguing that this differential treatment is necessary to achieve genuine equality of opportunity.

Supporters argue that affirmative action addresses ongoing effects of discrimination and provides equity by helping level the playing field for groups that face systemic disadvantages. Without these measures, they argue, formal equality simply perpetuates existing inequalities.

Critics argue that affirmative action violates equality principles by treating people differently based on characteristics they didn't choose, and that it can harm both intended beneficiaries (through stigmatization) and others (through reverse discrimination).

These debates reflect deeper disagreements about whether fairness requires identical treatment or whether it sometimes requires differential treatment to achieve equal outcomes.

Universal Basic Income and Targeted Programs

Debates about social welfare policy often center on whether to provide universal benefits (equality approach) or targeted support (equity approach). Universal Basic Income proposals would provide the same cash payment to all citizens, regardless of their circumstances. This represents pure equality – everyone receives identical treatment.

Targeted anti-poverty programs, by contrast, provide support only to those who meet certain criteria, such as low income or unemployment. This represents an equity approach – providing resources to those who need them most.

Each approach has advantages and disadvantages. Universal programs avoid stigma and administrative complexity but may provide resources to people who don't need them. Targeted programs focus resources on those with the greatest needs but may be complex to administer and may stigmatize recipients.

Digital Divide and Technology Access

The rapid digitization of many services and opportunities has created new questions about equality and equity in technology access. Should societies focus on providing equal access to basic internet and technology (equality approach), or should they provide enhanced support to communities and individuals who face particular barriers to digital participation (equity approach)?

An equality approach might focus on ensuring that high-speed internet is available in all communities and that all schools have computers and internet access. An equity approach might recognize that some communities face greater barriers – such as lower incomes, less digital literacy, or language barriers – and provide additional support to address these challenges.

Climate Change and Environmental Justice

Climate change raises complex questions about equality and equity both within and between countries. Should carbon reduction requirements apply equally to all countries (equality), or should they account for different levels of development and historical responsibility for emissions (equity)?

Within countries, climate policies may have different impacts on different communities. Carbon taxes might affect low-income households more severely, while green infrastructure investments might primarily benefit wealthier communities. Addressing these disparities requires attention to both equality (ensuring everyone is protected from climate impacts) and equity (recognizing that some communities may need additional support).

Practical Guidance: When to Use Equality vs. Equity

While there are no simple formulas for deciding when to emphasize equality versus equity, some practical guidelines can help navigate these decisions in real-world contexts.

Questions to Consider

When facing decisions about fairness, consider asking:

What is the goal? Are you trying to ensure equal dignity and respect, equal opportunities, equal treatment, or equal outcomes? Different goals may require different approaches.

What are the starting points? Do people begin from roughly equal positions, or are there significant differences in resources, opportunities, or circumstances that might affect their ability to benefit from equal treatment?

What are the barriers? Are there systematic obstacles that prevent some people from taking advantage of equal opportunities? Do these barriers require additional support to overcome?

What are the consequences? Will equal treatment produce fair outcomes, or will it perpetuate or worsen existing disparities?

What are the costs and trade-offs? What resources are required for different approaches, and how do the benefits compare to the costs?

Designing Policies That Balance Both

The most effective approaches to fairness often combine equality and equity principles. Some strategies for achieving this balance include:

Universal Programs with Progressive Elements: Provide basic services or benefits to everyone (equality) while offering additional support to those who need it most (equity). For example, universal healthcare that covers everyone but provides enhanced services in underserved communities.

Equal Standards with Differentiated Support: Hold everyone to the same high standards (equality) while providing whatever support is necessary to help everyone meet those standards (equity). For example, graduation requirements that apply to all students, combined with additional tutoring and support for students who are struggling.

Procedural Equality with Substantive Equity: Use fair and consistent processes for everyone (equality) while accounting for different circumstances and needs in outcomes (equity). For example, hiring processes that use the same criteria for everyone while making accommodations for people with disabilities.

Temporal Sequencing: Use equity measures to address current disparities and level the playing field, with the goal of eventually achieving genuine equality of opportunity. This recognizes that equity may be a means to achieving true equality rather than an end in itself.

The Future of Equality and Equity

As societies continue to evolve and face new challenges, our understanding of the relationship between equality and equity will likely continue to develop. Several trends suggest how this relationship might evolve in the future.

Intersectionality and Multiple Identities

Growing recognition of intersectionality – the ways that different forms of identity and disadvantage interact with each other – is making both equality and equity more complex. A person might face advantages in some areas and disadvantages in others, requiring nuanced approaches that account for multiple, intersecting identities.

This complexity suggests that future approaches to fairness will need to be more sophisticated, moving beyond simple categories to address the full complexity of people's experiences and circumstances.

Data and Personalization

Advances in data collection and analysis may make it possible to provide more personalized and precisely targeted equity interventions while maintaining equality principles. Technology might enable more nuanced understanding of individual needs and circumstances, allowing for more effective and fair allocation of resources and support.

However, this also raises concerns about privacy, surveillance, and the potential for data-driven systems to perpetuate or amplify existing biases.

Global Cooperation and Standards

As global challenges like climate change, migration, and economic inequality require international cooperation, there may be growing pressure to develop shared frameworks for balancing equality and equity across different cultural and political contexts.

This will require ongoing dialogue about how universal principles can be applied in ways that respect cultural diversity while maintaining commitment to human dignity and fairness.

Conclusion: Toward Justice That Works

The distinction between equality and equity is not merely academic – it has profound implications for how we design policies, institutions, and relationships that serve justice in the real world. Understanding this distinction helps us move beyond simplistic notions of "treating everyone the same" to more sophisticated approaches that can address the complexity of human difference and social inequality.

The key insight is that equality and equity are not opposites but complementary approaches to fairness that serve different purposes and are appropriate in different contexts. Both are necessary for creating a just society, and the most effective approaches typically combine elements of both.

Equality ensures that all people are recognized as having equal worth and dignity, that fundamental rights are protected universally, and that systems don't discriminate arbitrarily. Equity ensures that people's different circumstances and needs are recognized and addressed, that systematic barriers are removed, and that everyone has a genuine opportunity to thrive.

The challenge is learning to navigate the tensions between these approaches and to design solutions that serve both equal dignity and fair outcomes. This requires ongoing dialogue, careful attention to evidence and consequences, and willingness to adapt approaches as we learn more about what works.

Perhaps most importantly, it requires recognizing that fairness is not a destination but a journey – not a problem to be solved once and for all, but an ongoing commitment to creating conditions where all people can live with dignity and have genuine opportunities to flourish.

"Justice is not a thing to be gotten, but a way of being human together. It requires both equal dignity and genuine opportunity – both treating people as equals and ensuring they have what they need to succeed." - Contemporary justice scholar

As you apply these concepts in your own life and work, remember that the goal is not to choose between equality and equity, but to understand when each is appropriate and how they can work together to create more just and fair outcomes for everyone.

Whether you're making decisions in your workplace, advocating for policy changes, or simply trying to treat others fairly in your daily interactions, understanding the distinction between equality and equity will help you be more effective in creating positive change and contributing to a more just world.