On the Measurement of Inequality
TL;DR: In this paper, the problem of comparing two frequency distributions f(u) of an attribute y which for convenience I shall refer to as income is defined as a risk in the theory of decision-making under uncertainty.
About: This article is published in Journal of Economic Theory.The article was published on 1970-09-01. It has received 5002 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Income inequality metrics & Income distribution.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined income inequality across nine countries using the Luxembourg Income Study data set and provided an exceptionally clear picture of relative income inequality using new statistical tests and comparability of data.
Abstract: This paper examines income inequality across nine countries using the Luxembourg Income Study data set. New statistical tests and comparability of data provide an exceptionally clear picture of relative income inequality. Only 4 comparisons out of a possible 108 cannot be ranked. In most cases, differences in the definition of the recipient unit make little difference in the rankings. Irrespective of recipient units, Sweden, Norway, and Germany come out at the top of the ordinal Lorenz ranking, with Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom in the middle, and the United States and Switzerland at the bottom. Copyright 1991 by The London School of Economics and Political Science.
69 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the generalized beta of the second kind distribution was used as the imputation model for estimating income inequality with right-censored data, and multiply imputed observations were used to yield a partially synthetic data set from which point and variance estimates can be derived using complete data methods and appropriate combination formulae.
Abstract: Summary. To measure income inequality with right-censored (top-coded) data, we propose multiple-imputation methods for estimation and inference. Censored observations are multiply imputed using draws from a flexible parametric model fitted to the censored distribution, yielding a partially synthetic data set from which point and variance estimates can be derived using complete-data methods and appropriate combination formulae. The methods are illustrated using US Current Population Survey data and the generalized beta of the second kind distribution as the imputation model. With Current Population Survey internal data, we find few statistically significant differences in income inequality for pairs of years between 1995 and 2004. We also show that using Current Population Survey public use data with cell mean imputations may lead to incorrect inferences. Multiply-imputed public use data provide an intermediate solution.
69 citations
TL;DR: An inequality indicator for health benefits analysis should not decrease when risk is transferred from a low-risk to high-risk person, and that it should be able to have total inequality divided into its constituent parts (subgroup decomposability), and the Atkinson index is selected as the single indicator most appropriate.
Abstract: Although environmental policy decisions are often based in part on both risk assessment information and environmental justice concerns, formalized approaches for addressing inequality or inequity when estimating the health benefits of pollution control have been lacking. Inequality indicators that fulfill basic axioms and agree with relevant definitions and concepts in health benefits analysis and environmental justice analysis can allow for quantitative examination of efficiency-equality tradeoffs in pollution control policies. To develop appropriate inequality indicators for health benefits analysis, we provide relevant definitions from the fields of risk assessment and environmental justice and consider the implications. We evaluate axioms proposed in past studies of inequality indicators and develop additional axioms relevant to this context. We survey the literature on previous applications of inequality indicators and evaluate five candidate indicators in reference to our proposed axioms. We present an illustrative pollution control example to determine whether our selected indicators provide interpretable information. We conclude that an inequality indicator for health benefits analysis should not decrease when risk is transferred from a low-risk to high-risk person, and that it should decrease when risk is transferred from a high-risk to low-risk person (Pigou-Dalton transfer principle), and that it should be able to have total inequality divided into its constituent parts (subgroup decomposability). We additionally propose that an ideal indicator should avoid value judgments about the relative importance of transfers at different percentiles of the risk distribution, incorporate health risk with evidence about differential susceptibility, include baseline distributions of risk, use appropriate geographic resolution and scope, and consider multiple competing policy alternatives. Given these criteria, we select the Atkinson index as the single indicator most appropriate for health benefits analysis, with other indicators useful for sensitivity analysis. Our illustrative pollution control example demonstrates how these indices can help a policy maker determine control strategies that are dominated from an efficiency and equality standpoint, those that are dominated for some but not all societal viewpoints on inequality averseness, and those that are on the optimal efficiency-equality frontier, allowing for more informed pollution control policies.
69 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors define sustainability in terms of leaving it possible for future generations to sustain certain defined targets, and show that variants of genuine savings and the ecological footprint can then serve as indicators of sustainability.
68 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, a measure of risk aversion in the small, the risk premium or insurance premium for an arbitrary risk, and a natural concept of decreasing risk aversion are discussed and related to one another.
Abstract: This paper concerns utility functions for money. A measure of risk aversion in the small, the risk premium or insurance premium for an arbitrary risk, and a natural concept of decreasing risk aversion are discussed and related to one another. Risks are also considered as a proportion of total assets.
5,207 citations
Posted Content•
1,748 citations
"On the Measurement of Inequality" refers background in this paper
...3 See Rothschild and Stiglitz [13], Hadar and Russell [ 5 ], and Hanoch and Levy [6]....
[...]
1,738 citations
"On the Measurement of Inequality" refers methods in this paper
...Then by applying the results of Pratt [l 11, Arrow [ 2 ], and others, we can see that this requirement (which may be referred to as constant (relative) inequality-aversion) implies that U(y) has the form...
[...]
TL;DR: JSTOR as discussed by the authors is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship, which is used to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources.
Abstract: you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
1,544 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, an analysis of the first step of the decision-making process of an individual decision maker among alternative risky ventures is presented, in terms of a single dimension such as money, both for the utility functions and for the probability distributions.
Abstract: Publisher Summary The choice of an individual decision maker among alternative risky ventures may be regarded as a two-step procedure. The decision maker chooses an efficient set among all available portfolios, independently of his tastes or preferences. Then, the decision maker applies individual preferences to this set to choose the desired portfolio. The subject of this chapter is the analysis of the first step. It deals with optimal selection rules that minimize the efficient set by discarding any portfolio that is inefficient in the sense that it is inferior to a member of the efficient set, from point of view of each and every individual, when all individuals' utility functions are assumed to be of a given general class of admissible functions. The analysis presented in the chapter is carried out in terms of a single dimension such as money, both for the utility functions and for the probability distributions. However, the results may easily be extended, with minor changes in the theorems and the proofs, to the multivariate case. The chapter explains a necessary and sufficient condition for efficiency, when no further restrictions are imposed on the utility functions. It presents proofs of the optimal efficiency criterion in the presence of general risk aversion, that is, for concave utility functions.
1,160 citations