国家内部和国家之间的不平等

Michael C. Lovell
{"title":"国家内部和国家之间的不平等","authors":"Michael C. Lovell","doi":"10.1016/S0926-6437(99)80002-X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper looks at both within and among country inequality utilizing data for the 82 countries for which comparable data are available from the 1996 <em>World Development Report</em>. In the spirit of Dalton (1920) and Atkinson (1970), this paper reports estimates of the welfare loss arising from inequality. The paper also explores the implications of Duesenberry style interdependent utility functions and evaluates the appropriateness of the Gini coefficient as a possible measure of “relative deprivation”. In 18% of the pairwise comparisons of inequality in different countries, the situation is ambiguous in the sense that neither country Lorenz dominates the other (Shorrocks, 1982). Generalized Lorenz curves leave ambiguous 16% of paired welfare comparisons. The data generated a surprisingly stable empirical result: for <em>any</em> utility function satisfying Dalton's Principle of Proportionality of Transfers, the loss of welfare rising from within country inequality is approximately 40% of the loss caused by inequality among nations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100788,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Income Distribution","volume":"8 1","pages":"Pages 5-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0926-6437(99)80002-X","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inequality within and among nations\",\"authors\":\"Michael C. Lovell\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S0926-6437(99)80002-X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper looks at both within and among country inequality utilizing data for the 82 countries for which comparable data are available from the 1996 <em>World Development Report</em>. In the spirit of Dalton (1920) and Atkinson (1970), this paper reports estimates of the welfare loss arising from inequality. The paper also explores the implications of Duesenberry style interdependent utility functions and evaluates the appropriateness of the Gini coefficient as a possible measure of “relative deprivation”. In 18% of the pairwise comparisons of inequality in different countries, the situation is ambiguous in the sense that neither country Lorenz dominates the other (Shorrocks, 1982). Generalized Lorenz curves leave ambiguous 16% of paired welfare comparisons. The data generated a surprisingly stable empirical result: for <em>any</em> utility function satisfying Dalton's Principle of Proportionality of Transfers, the loss of welfare rising from within country inequality is approximately 40% of the loss caused by inequality among nations.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100788,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Income Distribution\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages 5-44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1998-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0926-6437(99)80002-X\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Income Distribution\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092664379980002X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Income Distribution","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092664379980002X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

本文利用《1996年世界发展报告》提供的82个国家的可比数据,研究了国家内部和国家之间的不平等现象。本着道尔顿(1920)和阿特金森(1970)的精神,本文报告了对不平等造成的福利损失的估计。本文还探讨了Duesenberry风格的相互依存效用函数的含义,并评估了基尼系数作为“相对剥夺”的可能度量的适当性。在18%的不同国家不平等的两两比较中,情况是模糊的,因为没有一个国家的洛伦兹支配另一个国家(Shorrocks, 1982)。广义洛伦兹曲线使16%的成对福利比较模棱两可。数据产生了一个惊人的稳定的经验结果:对于任何满足道尔顿转移比例原则的效用函数,国家内部不平等造成的福利损失大约是国家之间不平等造成的损失的40%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inequality within and among nations

This paper looks at both within and among country inequality utilizing data for the 82 countries for which comparable data are available from the 1996 World Development Report. In the spirit of Dalton (1920) and Atkinson (1970), this paper reports estimates of the welfare loss arising from inequality. The paper also explores the implications of Duesenberry style interdependent utility functions and evaluates the appropriateness of the Gini coefficient as a possible measure of “relative deprivation”. In 18% of the pairwise comparisons of inequality in different countries, the situation is ambiguous in the sense that neither country Lorenz dominates the other (Shorrocks, 1982). Generalized Lorenz curves leave ambiguous 16% of paired welfare comparisons. The data generated a surprisingly stable empirical result: for any utility function satisfying Dalton's Principle of Proportionality of Transfers, the loss of welfare rising from within country inequality is approximately 40% of the loss caused by inequality among nations.

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