Indian Income Inequality, 1922‐2015: From British Raj to Billionaire Raj?

Chancel, Lucas; Piketty, Thomas

doi:10.1111/roiw.12439

Cited by 129 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

116

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is also worth stressing that inequality levels in the Middle East appear to be significantly larger than those observed in giant countries with much larger populations such as China and India (Figures a and 2b). Here we use inequality estimates that were recently constructed for China and India by Piketty, Yang and Zucman () and Chancel and Piketty (). These estimates are obviously far from perfect, but they probably tend to minimize the gap with the Middle East (in particular, we have access to more extensive income tax data for China and India than the for the Middle East).…”

Section: Main Results: Extreme Concentration Of Income In the Middle mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring lnequality in the Middle East 1990–2016: The World’s Most Unequal Region?

Alvaredo

Assouad

Piketty

2018

Review of Income and Wealth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we combine household surveys, national accounts, income tax data and wealth data in order to estimate income concentration in the Middle East for the period 1990–2016. According to our benchmark series, the Middle East appears to be the most unequal region in the world, with a top decile income share as large as 64 percent, compared to 37 percent in Western Europe, 47 percent in the US and 55 percent in Brazil (see Alvaredo et al. 2018). This is due both to enormous inequality between countries (particularly between oil‐rich and population‐rich countries) and to large inequality within countries (which we probably under‐estimate, given the limited access to proper fiscal data). We stress the importance of increasing transparency on income and wealth in the Middle East, as well as the need to develop mechanisms of regional redistribution and investment.

show abstract

Section: Main Results: Extreme Concentration Of Income In the Middle mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring lnequality in the Middle East 1990–2016: The World’s Most Unequal Region?

Alvaredo

Assouad

Piketty

2018

Review of Income and Wealth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The combination of data from household surveys and tax records, scaled up so as to match national account aggregates, is the foundation of the newly launched World Inequality Report (Alvaredo et al , ). In South Asia, this second approach was applied to India by Chancel and Piketty (, ), building on a previous study by Banerjee and Piketty, ().…”

Section: Poorer Versus Richer Householdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges in Measuring Poverty and Understanding its Dynamics: A South Asian Perspective

Rama¹

2019

Review of Income and Wealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SouthAsia's success at reducing poverty does not imply that the topic has become passé. Poverty rates are by now low, but this is because poverty lines are low as well. And the assessment of living standards and their dynamics are blurred by measurement and interpretation challenges. This paper relies mostly on South Asian examples to highlight four tensions: poorer versus richer households, rural versus urban locations, monetary versus non-monetary dimensions of wellbeing, and household characteristics versus context. The discussion is conducted against the backdrop of the two analytical approaches with South Asian roots that have shaped the debate for decades. This review leads to three main recommendations: household survey data has to be exploited in a more thorough manner, data that is increasingly available from other sources needs to be incorporated more systematically in the analysis, and the multiple dimensions of wellbeing should be better integrated in a common framework.JEL Codes: D31, I32, O1

show abstract

“…Evidence of rising inequality in India since 1991 is reported in Ravallion (2000), Deaton and Drèze (2002), Sen and Himanshu (2004a, 2004b), Datt and Ravallion (2011), and Chancel and Piketty (2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is evidence from other sources consistent with that expectation; see Banerjee and Piketty (2005) on income under‐reporting by India's rich. Chancel and Piketty (2017) work with the benchmark scenario that surveys are a reliable source of information up to the 90th percentile of the distribution.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Poverty and Growth in India over Six Decades

Datt¹,

Ravallion²,

Murgai³

2019

American J Agri Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study the evolution of consumption-poverty measures for post-independence India, including 20 years since extensive economic reforms began in 1991. Progress against poverty was negligible until the mid-1970s, after which a downward trend in poverty measures emerged. The pace of poverty reduction accelerated in the post-reform period, despite rising inequality amidst faster growth. A key finding is that the relationship to the pattern of growth changed greatly, suggesting stronger intersectoral linkages, with urban consumption growth benefiting both the rural and urban poor. In contrast to the prereform period, growth in primary, secondary and tertiary sector outputs yielded similar impacts on poverty.

show abstract

Indian Income Inequality, 1922‐2015: From British Raj to Billionaire Raj?

Cited by 129 publications

References 17 publications

Measuring lnequality in the Middle East 1990–2016: The World’s Most Unequal Region?

Measuring lnequality in the Middle East 1990–2016: The World’s Most Unequal Region?

Challenges in Measuring Poverty and Understanding its Dynamics: A South Asian Perspective

Poverty and Growth in India over Six Decades

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About