Approaches to Inequality of Opportunity: Principles, Measures and Evidence

Ramos, Xavier; gaer, Dirk Van de

doi:10.1111/joes.12121

Cited by 171 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

143

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1 More recently, contributions by Thomas Piketty and Anthony Atkinson have drawn attention to the role of income inequality as a determinant in the reduction in the pace of economic growth (Atkinson andPiketty, 2007 andPiketty, 2014). An inclusive review of the literature by Franzini and Pianta (2016) effectively summarizes the basic argument according to which the raising levels of income inequality have direct negative consequences that include both: i) the negative economic effects stemming from a decline in marginal propensity to consumption and the accumulation of financial capital (Atkinson, 2015), and ii) relevant socioeconomic aspects in terms of inequality of opportunities (Ramos and Van de Gaer, 2015) and reduction in happiness (Ferrer-iCarbonell and Ramos, 2014). An increasing awareness of such negative consequences, both economic and societal, draws attention to the identification of determinants of income inequality as the necessary condition for defining appropriate economic policy aimed at limiting its impact.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological change, rent and income inequalities: A Schumpeterian approach

Antonelli

Gehringer

2017

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing levels of income inequality have recently attracted much attention. The literature has concentrated on the hypothesis that increasing levels of income inequality are the cause of slow growth and social unbalances. This paper contributes to exploring an alternative hypothesis according to which increasing levels of income inequality are the consequence, rather than the cause, of slow growth and more specifically of the slowing pace of technological change. The paper articulates the Schumpeterian hypothesis that the rate of technological change exerts a significant influence in reducing income distribution. Due to the powerful effects of creative destruction, the rate of technological change engenders a reduction in wealth and rent inequalities that are highly skewed and, consequently, limits income inequality. We test this hypothesis in an empirical exercise by implementing quantile regressions on a large dataset of advanced and industrializing economies. The inequality diminishing effect of technological change holds along the entire income inequality distribution, but exhibits larger effects in countries where the concentration of wealth and, consequently, income asymmetries are stronger. These results have novel welfare implications and suggest some crucial insights for economic policy analysis.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological change, rent and income inequalities: A Schumpeterian approach

Antonelli

Gehringer

2017

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is also true for all the documents cited. As expressed by Ramos and van de Gaer (2015), a unified methodology to estimate equality of opportunities does not exist and everything depends on the available data.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Ramos and van de Gaer (2015), on many occasions measures of inequality of opportunities do not have any theoretical basis and are ad hoc choices by researchers. Under these conditions, we apply the methodology proposed by Shorrocks (1982) to establish the contribution that every income source (earnings, capital income, transfers, etc.)…”

Section: B Measuring Inequality Of Opportunities In Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Health opportunities in Colombia

Rivera

2017

Lec Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These criteria revolve around the idea of distinguishing fair inequalities, i.e., outcome inequalities due to e¤ort and responsibility, from the unfair inequalities that are instead due to exogenous circusmtances (such as race, gender, parental background). For recent surveys, see Ramos and Van de gaer (2015), Ferreira and Peragine (2015), Roemer and Trannoy (2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ex post inequality of opportunity comparisons

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research at DIW BerlinThis series presents research findings based either directly on data from the German SocioEconomic Panel study (SOEP) or using SOEP data as part of an internationally comparable data set (e.g. CNEF, ECHP, LIS, LWS, CHER/PACO). SOEP is a truly multidisciplinary household panel study covering a wide range of social and behavioral sciences: economics, sociology, psychology, survey methodology, econometrics and applied statistics, educational science, political science, public health, behavioral genetics, demography, geography, and sport science.The decision to publish a submission in SOEPpapers is made by a board of editors chosen by the DIW Berlin to represent the wide range of disciplines covered by SOEP. There is no external referee process and papers are either accepted or rejected without revision. Papers appear in this series as works in progress and may also appear elsewhere. They often represent preliminary studies and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be requested from the author directly.Any opinions expressed in this series are those of the author(s) and not those of DIW Berlin.Research disseminated by DIW Berlin may include views on public policy issues, but the institute itself takes no institutional policy positions. AbstractIn this paper we propose di¤erent criteria to rank income distributions according to equality of opportunity. Di¤erent from existing ones, our criteria explicitly recognize the interplay between circumstances and e¤ort. We characterize them axiomatically and we compare them with existing criteria; then we propose some scalar measures. We show that our ex post criteria are mostly obtained from "seemingly" ex ante properties. In the second part of the paper we apply our new criteria to measuring inequality of opportunity in Germany. We illustrate our ex-post inequality of opportunity approach based on classes by means of the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) for the …rst decade of the 2000s. JEL: D3, D63, D71

show abstract

Approaches to Inequality of Opportunity: Principles, Measures and Evidence

Cited by 171 publications

References 75 publications

Technological change, rent and income inequalities: A Schumpeterian approach

Technological change, rent and income inequalities: A Schumpeterian approach

Health opportunities in Colombia

Ex post inequality of opportunity comparisons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About