不平等与收入流动性:印度有针对性和普遍性干预措施的案例

Anindya S. Chakrabarti, Abinash Mishra, Mohsen Mohaghegh
{"title":"不平等与收入流动性:印度有针对性和普遍性干预措施的案例","authors":"Anindya S. Chakrabarti, Abinash Mishra, Mohsen Mohaghegh","doi":"10.1007/s10888-023-09614-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Income interventions with pro-poor targeting is a common fiscal policy around the world. However their distributional effects on consumption and savings are not well understood. Motivated by the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), we use longitudinal data on income and consumption of Indian households to estimate distributional effects of such interventions in a model with endogenous consumption and savings distribution, where households face uninsured income risks. In the model, a standard scheme of interventions that consistently targets low-income cohorts, has small distributional impacts on targeted and non-targeted cohorts alike. In contrast, a fiscally-equivalent scheme that changes the expected income profile of the targeted households in the same initial cohort irrespective of their future incomes, generates larger effects by changing income mobility for both the targeted and non-targeted cohorts. This mobility-based channel generates consumption responses even though the magnitude of the shock is lesser for the initially targeted cohort, as it more than offsets the effect from permanent income shock. Quantitatively, such an intervention in the order of 0.6 percent of output, approximating the Indian scenario, increases consumption share of the targeted cohort by nearly 2.5 percent, five times as large as the effect of standard interventions. The distributional effects are similar to those arising from a counterfactual policy of universal basic income.</p>","PeriodicalId":501277,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Economic Inequality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inequality and income mobility: the case of targeted and universal interventions in India\",\"authors\":\"Anindya S. Chakrabarti, Abinash Mishra, Mohsen Mohaghegh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10888-023-09614-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Income interventions with pro-poor targeting is a common fiscal policy around the world. However their distributional effects on consumption and savings are not well understood. Motivated by the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), we use longitudinal data on income and consumption of Indian households to estimate distributional effects of such interventions in a model with endogenous consumption and savings distribution, where households face uninsured income risks. In the model, a standard scheme of interventions that consistently targets low-income cohorts, has small distributional impacts on targeted and non-targeted cohorts alike. In contrast, a fiscally-equivalent scheme that changes the expected income profile of the targeted households in the same initial cohort irrespective of their future incomes, generates larger effects by changing income mobility for both the targeted and non-targeted cohorts. This mobility-based channel generates consumption responses even though the magnitude of the shock is lesser for the initially targeted cohort, as it more than offsets the effect from permanent income shock. Quantitatively, such an intervention in the order of 0.6 percent of output, approximating the Indian scenario, increases consumption share of the targeted cohort by nearly 2.5 percent, five times as large as the effect of standard interventions. The distributional effects are similar to those arising from a counterfactual policy of universal basic income.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501277,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Economic Inequality\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Economic Inequality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-023-09614-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Economic Inequality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-023-09614-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以扶贫为目标的收入干预措施是全世界常见的财政政策。然而,人们对其对消费和储蓄的分配影响还不甚了解。受《圣雄甘地全国农村就业保障法》(MGNREGA)的启发,我们利用印度家庭收入和消费的纵向数据,在一个具有内生消费和储蓄分布的模型中估算了此类干预措施的分配效应,在该模型中,家庭面临无保险的收入风险。在该模型中,一贯针对低收入群体的标准干预计划对目标群体和非目标群体的分配影响都很小。与此相反,一个财政上等同的方案改变了同一初始组群中目标家庭的预期收入状况,而不论其未来收入如何,该方案通过改变目标组群和非目标组群的收入流动性产生了更大的影响。这种以流动性为基础的渠道会产生消费反应,即使冲击的幅度对最初的目标群组来说较小,因为它足以抵消永久性收入冲击的影响。从数量上看,这种约占产出 0.6%的干预(近似于印度的情况)使目标人群的消费份额增加了近 2.5%,是标准干预效果的五倍。其分配效应与全民基本收入政策的反事实效应相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inequality and income mobility: the case of targeted and universal interventions in India

Income interventions with pro-poor targeting is a common fiscal policy around the world. However their distributional effects on consumption and savings are not well understood. Motivated by the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), we use longitudinal data on income and consumption of Indian households to estimate distributional effects of such interventions in a model with endogenous consumption and savings distribution, where households face uninsured income risks. In the model, a standard scheme of interventions that consistently targets low-income cohorts, has small distributional impacts on targeted and non-targeted cohorts alike. In contrast, a fiscally-equivalent scheme that changes the expected income profile of the targeted households in the same initial cohort irrespective of their future incomes, generates larger effects by changing income mobility for both the targeted and non-targeted cohorts. This mobility-based channel generates consumption responses even though the magnitude of the shock is lesser for the initially targeted cohort, as it more than offsets the effect from permanent income shock. Quantitatively, such an intervention in the order of 0.6 percent of output, approximating the Indian scenario, increases consumption share of the targeted cohort by nearly 2.5 percent, five times as large as the effect of standard interventions. The distributional effects are similar to those arising from a counterfactual policy of universal basic income.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信