While purchasing power parity (PPP) between countries has received a great deal of attention, PPP calculations within countries have received less attention. The idea that one unit of currency has the same purchasing power in all regions in large countries is false. This paper addresses this limitation by proposing a methodology for calculating rural‐urban PPP in India. The paper introduces a concept of item‐specific PPP that exploits the analogy with an item‐specific equivalence scale. The methodology relies on demographically‐varying preferences to estimate PPP. The results underline the need to incorporate spatial differences in PPP calculations in countries with heterogeneous preferences.

In this paper we explore the possibility of using the Atkinson (1970) – Kolm (1969) – Sen (1973) general ethical index in polarisation measurement. It is shown that though inequality and polarisation are two dissimilar concepts, different indices of inequality may be used to generate alternative indices of polarisation. A numerical illustration based on Indian household expenditure survey data is provided using several polarisation indices.

In this paper we propose a method of estimating multilateral regional price index numbers from a given household level data set on item-wise unit values/prices. The method is closely related to the Country-Product Dummy variable model of Summers (1973). This method is likely to be particularly useful in studies of regional comparisons of poverty and inequality, optimal commodity taxes and tax reforms. To illustrate the method, we use it to calculate the regional consumer price index numbers for Eastern, Western and Southern India (taking Northern India as the reference region) separately for three categories of rural and urban households, viz., all households and those below and above the poverty line, using household level unit records of the NSS 50th round (1993-94) Consumer Expenditure Survey. Copyright 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Absolute polarization indices remain unchanged under equal absolute augmentation in all incomes. This paper identifies the class of absolute polarization indices whose orderings of alternative income distributions agree with the rankings generated by nonintersecting absolute polarization curves. We explore the possibility of using the Kolm (1976)-BlackorbyDonaldson (1980) ethical absolute inequality index in polarization measurement. We establish that although inequality and polarization are dissimilar concepts, different absolute inequality indices can be employed to design alternative absolute polarization indices. A numerical illustration is provided using Indian data and it is shown that inequality and polarization are different issues in income distribution analysis. JEL Classification Numbers: C43, D31, D63.

This study departs from the previous literature on purchasing power parity (PPP) by proposing a demand system based methodology for calculating the PPP that takes account of consumer preferences and allows for the substitution effect of price changes. The methodology is used to calculate the PPP between the Indian Rupee and the Vietnamese Dong. The study allows for regional variation in preferences and price changes both inside the country and between countries. It proposes and applies a methodology for constructing prices from unit values after adjusting them for quality and demographic effects. The adjusted unit values are used as prices in the demand estimations, and the demand parameter estimates are used to calculate both spatial prices within each country and the PPP between the two countries within a consistent framework. The study illustrates the usefulness of preference consistent methods to calculate the PPP by applying the PPPs to compare living standards between India and Vietnam. The significance of the results follows from the fact that the levels of living comparisons are quite sensitive to the PPP used in converting the Rupee expenditure into Vietnamese Dong. The present results on food PPPs question the relevance of the PPPs from the ICP project in cross-country welfare comparisons especially in a period of high food inflation.JEL Codes: C18, D11, E31, O53