2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measuring unfair (in)equality

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
122
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 128 publications
(135 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
122
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It turns out that methods for purging inequality from the effects of a factor while holding others constant as in Almås and Mogstad () have been the focus of the literature on responsibility and compensation (Fleurbaey and Maniquet, ). Indeed, technically and conceptually, the age‐adjustment procedures in wealth inequality bear resemblance to the measures of (in‐)equality of opportunity that attempt to disentangle ‘fair’ and ‘unfair’ inequalities attributable to effort, luck or individual a priori circumstances (Almås et al ., ; Roemer and Trannoy, ).…”
Section: Wealth Inequality and The Structure Of Wealth Distributionsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…It turns out that methods for purging inequality from the effects of a factor while holding others constant as in Almås and Mogstad () have been the focus of the literature on responsibility and compensation (Fleurbaey and Maniquet, ). Indeed, technically and conceptually, the age‐adjustment procedures in wealth inequality bear resemblance to the measures of (in‐)equality of opportunity that attempt to disentangle ‘fair’ and ‘unfair’ inequalities attributable to effort, luck or individual a priori circumstances (Almås et al ., ; Roemer and Trannoy, ).…”
Section: Wealth Inequality and The Structure Of Wealth Distributionsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…(9) at p.497, the fair distribution to agent i is given by what the average level of pre-tax income in the economy would have been had everybody's vector of responsibility factors matched that of agent i (together with a uniform transfer designed to ensure that the total of the fair distributions matches actual production). The setting in Almås et al (2011) is not directly applicable to our team production setting, since pre-tax income is allowed to vary only in individuals' own vector of characteristics. However, Bossert (1995, p.3) notes that "A possible generalization… would be to allow pre-tax incomes to depend on the entire characteristics profile."…”
Section: Examplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Almås et al (2011) also present the 'conditional egalitarian' principle and an alternative form of the egalitarian equivalent principle. These are designed to account for differences in non-responsibility factors.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gini index seems to be the most used to measure inequalities (Almas, Cappelen, Lind, Sorenson, & Tungodden, 2011;Cowel, 2000), especially because it satisfies the five properties of the inequality index (Chakravarty, 1999;Shorrocks, 1980). 3 The Gini coefficient is an income concentration indicator (Gini, 1921).…”
Section: Methodology and Datamentioning
confidence: 99%