Assessment of Wealth Diversity (Case of Lithuania)

Abstract

The high level of income and wealth distribution in the world is recognized as a phenomenon that leads to negative economic and social consequences. The imperfection of redistribution levers in the economy has created conditions for the concentration of resources, material goods and wealth in small population groups. Today, the economic system is not focused on majority of the population, and therefore the high level of inequality and its consequences for economic growth, well-being and human development cannot be ignored. In this context, too high economic inequality in Lithuania is one of the most sensitive problems of the country; Lithuania is an anti-leader in the European Union according to economic inequality. Conventionally, economic inequality is measured using such methods as distribution of income and consumption of the population, however, to find out the real level of inequality, wealth diversity should be studied as well. The main purpose of this article is to identify and emphasise wealth diversity as an inseparable part of economic inequality in Lithuania and, as a result, the poor quality of life and obstacles in the way of economic progress as well as to compare wealth inequality with income inequality in Lithuania. The authors organised a representative poll of Lithuanian citizens and used a certain survey to collect information about the dwelling-places or other types of assets owned by the respondents as well as to evaluate wealth diversity in the country. The results show that the edge value of the assets owned by the representatives between I and X deciles differs by 16.9 times. However, comparing the average prices of dwelling-places in deciles I and X, the difference amounts to 7.2 times. Assessing all types of assets, including accommodation, land, durable goods, etc., it has been revealed that the distribution of wealth exceeds the limit of income and consumption distribution established by various statistical organisations and by the authors themselves. The decile ratio (in relation to deciles I and X) equals to 40.8, thus, it considerably exceeds the level of income and consumption inequality.

Psychometric Properties of Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) and Psychological Capital Questionnaire (PCQ-24) in the Lithuanian Population

“…Moreover, Lithuania is still suffering high socio-economic inequality [ 19 ]. The study on Life Quality, conducted in Lithuania in 2014, demonstrated strong associations between the net income per month and overall satisfaction with life [ 20 ].…”

The Economics of Sustainability

“…The first calculations of global inequality were made in the early 1970s (Berry, Bourguignon, & Morrison, 1983). Trends in global inequality and the causes of change have been studied by Atkinson (1998), Ravallion (2001), Bresler (2000), Lee and Son (2016), and Rakauskienė et al (2017), etc.…”

“…Meanwhile, Rakauskienė et al (2017) divide the factors determining economic inequality into three broad groups: economic, socio-demographic and psychological factors. The authors state that some factors affect inequality directly, othersindirectly, and others form the medium, circumstances for the mentioned factors.…”

“…The authors also single out the fiscal policies pursued by the institutions, which can contribute to reducing income inequality. Rakauskienė et al (2017) state that inequality arises for the following reasons:…”

Change in the Affordability of Owner-Occupied Housing in the Context of Rising Energy Prices

“…A huge volume of literature documents that household energy and energy and housing poverty is increasingly vital for maintaining good health and is reflected in policymakers' decisions. Many authors deal with the issue of poor housing [20][21][22], energy poverty [23][24][25][26], socioeconomic disadvantage [27][28][29] and climate change [30][31][32] from various perspectives. Pala [33] considers climate change as one of the crucial factors of household's well-being, Stanimir [34] discusses socioeconomic disadvantages connected to poverty through the lens participation of vulnerable communities in labor market and their preference of immediate remuneration in exchange of longer-term stability and career growth.…”