In recent years attention has been drawn to several shortcomings of the Concentration Index, a frequently used indicator of the socioeconomic inequality of health. Some modifications have been suggested, but these are only partial remedies. This paper proposes a corrected version of the Concentration Index which is superior to the original Concentration Index and its variants, in the sense that it is a rank-dependent indicator which satisfies four key requirements (transfer, level independence, cardinal invariance, and mirror). The paper also shows how the corrected Concentration Index can be decomposed and generalized.

This study investigates the role of information and communication technology (ICT) on income inequality through financial development dynamics of depth (money supply and liquid liabilities), efficiency (at banking and financial system levels), activity (from banking and financial system perspectives) and size, in 48 African countries for the period 1996 to 2014. The empirical evidence is based on Generalised Method of Moments. While both financial depth and size are established to reduce inequality contingent on ICT, only the effect of financial depth in reducing inequality is robust to the inclusion of time invariant variables to the set of strictly exogenous variables. We extend the analysis by decomposing financial depth into its components, namely: formal, informal, semi-formal and non-formal financial sectors. The findings based on this extension show that ICT reduces income inequality through formal financial sector development and financial sector formalization as opposed to informal financial sector development and financial sector informalization. The study contributes at the same time to the macroeconomic literature on measuring financial development and responds to the growing field of addressing post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) inequality challenges by means of ICT and financial access.

Disclaimer: AFEA Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) that has been peerreviewed and forthcoming in scientific outlets. There is a tacit acknowledgement of anonymous referees for constructive suggestions and critiques that have helped improve the content and rigour of the study. Each research stands on its merit and the views expressed in AFEA Working Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the AFEA, its Executive Board, or AFEA management.

The tools to be used and other choices to be made when measuring socioeconomic inequalities with rank-dependent inequality indices have recently been debated in this journal. This paper adds to this debate by stressing the importance of the measurement scale, by providing formal proofs of several issues in the debate, and by lifting the curtain on the confusing debate between adherents of absolute versus relative health differences. We end this paper with a ‘matrix’ that provides guidelines on the usefulness of several rank-dependent inequality indices under varying circumstances.

No abstract

In this paper we explore different ways to obtain decompositions of rank-dependent indices of socioeconomic inequality of health, such as the Concentration Index. Our focus is on the regression-based type of decomposition. Depending on whether the regression explains the health variable, or the socioeconomic variable, or both, a different decomposition formula is generated. We illustrate the differences using data from the Ethiopia 2011 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS).Acknowledgements: We thank Tom Van Ourti and Philip Clarke for discussions related to decomposition analysis, and Ellen Van de Poel for assistance with regard to the Ethiopian data. We are also grateful to seminar participants at the

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in August 2, 2010Abstract The tools to be used and other choices to be made when measuring socioeconomic inequalities with rank-dependent inequality indices have recently been debated in this journal. This paper adds to this debate by stressing the importance of the measurement scale, by providing formal proofs of several issues in the debate, and by lifting the curtain on the confusing debate between adherents of absolute versus relative health differences. We end this paper with a 'matrix' that provides guidelines on the usefulness of several rankdependent inequality indices under varying circumstances.

This paper explores four alternative indices for measuring health inequalities in a way that takes into account attitudes towards inequality. First, we revisit the extended concentration index which has been proposed to make it possible to introduce changes into the distributional value judgements implicit in the standard concentration index. Next, we suggest an alternative index based on a different weighting scheme. In contrast to the extended concentration index, this new index has the ‘symmetry’ property. We also show how these indices can be generalized so that they satisfy the ‘mirror’ property, which may be seen as a desirable property when dealing with bounded variables. We compare the different indices empirically for under-five mortality rates and the number of antenatal visits in developing countries.