This article investigates the distributional implication of relative price movements in Australia. It proposes and applies a method of evaluating the nature and size of the inequality bias of price movements. In the process, the study introduces a new demographic demand model that yields sensible and statistically significant estimates of the general equivalence scale and the size economies of scale. The study finds that relative price movements in Australia during the 1990s had an inequality increasing bias and that this bias increased in the late 1990s and the first part of the new millennium. The disaggregated analysis of the inequality movements shows that the regressive nature of relative price changes affected the renters much more than non-renters. The study also provides evidence on the decomposition of overall inequality between demographic groups and compares the decomposition between the nominal and real expenditure inequalities.

No abstract

This article extends the recent literature on static multidimensional deprivation to propose dynamic deprivation measures that incorporate both the persistence and duration of deprivation across multiple dimensions. The article then illustrates the usefulness of the extension by applying it to Australian panel data for the recent period, 2001-2008. The empirical application exploits the subgroup decomposability of the deprivation measures to identify the subgroups that are more deprived than others. The proposed measure is also decomposable by dimensions and is used to identify the dimensions where deprivation is more persistent. The comparison between the subgroups shows that the divide between homeowners and non-homeowners is one of the sharpest, with the latter suffering much more deprivation than the former. The results are robust to alternative schemes for weighting and aggregating the dimensions as well as to the choice of model parameters.

We develop a multidimensional poverty measure that is sensitive to the within‐individual distribution of deprivations across dimensions and time. Our measure combines features from a static multidimensional measure (Alkire and Foster, ) and a time‐dependent unidimensional measure (Foster, ). The proposed measure separately identifies—and can therefore be decomposed according to—the proportion of the poverty score attributable to: (i) the concentration of deprivations within periods; (ii) the concentration of deprivations within dimensions. In doing so it allows for a poverty ranking that is robust to assumptions about the trade‐off between the two components. Previous measures have not allowed for the features proposed here due to the inability to calculate the exact contribution of each dimension to overall poverty. We overcome this by adapting to our measure the Shapley decomposition proposed in Shorrocks () (based on Shapley, ). The measure is applied to data from China, 2000‐2011.

This paper proposes and applies an alternative demographic procedure for extending a demand system to allow for the effect of household size and composition changes, along with price changes, on expenditure allocation. The demographic procedure is applied to two recent demand functional forms to obtain their estimable demographic extensions. The estimation on pooled time series of Australian Household Expenditure Surveys yields sensible and robust estimates of the equivalence scale, and of its variation with relative prices. Further evidence on the usefulness of this procedure is provided by using it to evaluate the nature and magnitude of the inequality bias of relative price changes in Australia over a period from the late 1980s to the early part of the new millennium.