IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revinw/v56y2010i1p186-214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Microsimulation Evaluation Of Efficiency, Inequality, And Polarization Effects Of Implementing The Danish, The French, And The U.K. Redistribution System In Spain

Author

Listed:
  • Xisco Oliver
  • Luca Piccoli
  • Amedeo Spadaro

Abstract

This paper provides evidence about the effects of possible reforms of the Spanish direct redistribution system. We perform an ex‐ante evaluation of the impact upon efficiency, income distribution, and polarization of the replacement of the Spanish system with the ones enforced in France, the U.K., and Denmark (corporatist, liberal, and social‐democratic model respectively). The analysis is performed using microsimulation models in which labor supply is explicitly taken into account. The results show that the simulated scenarios have little impact on the efficiency of the economy. We find that each of the new systems would reduce income inequality. However, when we take into consideration income polarization, the effects of the reforms are ambiguous: in some cases we observe a tendency toward an increased polarization.

Suggested Citation

  • Xisco Oliver & Luca Piccoli & Amedeo Spadaro, 2010. "A Microsimulation Evaluation Of Efficiency, Inequality, And Polarization Effects Of Implementing The Danish, The French, And The U.K. Redistribution System In Spain," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 56(1), pages 186-214, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revinw:v:56:y:2010:i:1:p:186-214
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-4991.2009.00369.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2009.00369.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2009.00369.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. Aaberge & U. Colombino & T. Wennemo, 2009. "Evaluating Alternative Representations Of The Choice Sets In Models Of Labor Supply," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 586-612, July.
    2. Hausman, Jerry A, 1985. "The Econometrics of Nonlinear Budget Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(6), pages 1255-1282, November.
    3. Jean-Yves Duclos & Joan Esteban & Debraj Ray, 2004. "Polarization: Concepts, Measurement, Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(6), pages 1737-1772, November.
    4. Richard Blundell & Alan Duncan & Julian McCrae & Costas Meghir, 2000. "The labour market impact of the working families’ tax credit," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 75-103, March.
    5. Aaberge, Rolf & Flood, Lennart, 2008. "Evaluation of an In-work Tax Credit Reform in Sweden: Effects on Labor Supply and Welfare Participation of Single Mothers," Working Papers in Economics 319, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    6. M. Keane & R. Mofitt, 1995. "A Structural Model of Multiple Welfare Program Participation and Labor Supply," Working Papers 95-4, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    7. Keane, Michael & Moffitt, Robert, 1998. "A Structural Model of Multiple Welfare Program Participation and Labor Supply," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(3), pages 553-589, August.
    8. Esteban, Joan & Ray, Debraj, 1994. "On the Measurement of Polarization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 819-851, July.
    9. Olivier Bargain, 2004. "On modeling household labor supply with taxation," DELTA Working Papers 2004-14, DELTA (Ecole normale supérieure).
    10. José Labeaga & Xisco Oliver & Amedeo Spadaro, 2008. "Discrete choice models of labour supply, behavioural microsimulation and the Spanish tax reforms," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 6(3), pages 247-273, September.
    11. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    12. Wolfson, Michael C, 1994. "When Inequalities Diverge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 353-358, May.
    13. Xisco Oliver & Amedeo Spadaro, 2004. "Descripción técnica del modelo de microsimulación del sistema fiscal español “GLADHISPANIA”," DEA Working Papers 7, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.
    14. Arthur van Soest, 1995. "Structural Models of Family Labor Supply: A Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30(1), pages 63-88.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mario Holzner, 2012. "The Determinants of Income Polarization on the Household and Country Level across the EU," wiiw Working Papers 93, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. José Labeaga & Xisco Oliver & Amedeo Spadaro, 2008. "Discrete choice models of labour supply, behavioural microsimulation and the Spanish tax reforms," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 6(3), pages 247-273, September.
    2. Rolf Aaberge & Ugo Colombino, 2014. "Labour Supply Models," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Handbook of Microsimulation Modelling, volume 127, pages 167-221, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    3. Olivier Bargain, 2004. "On modeling household labor supply with taxation," DELTA Working Papers 2004-14, DELTA (Ecole normale supérieure).
    4. John K. Dagsvik & Zhiyang Jia & Tom Kornstad & Thor O. Thoresen, 2014. "Theoretical And Practical Arguments For Modeling Labor Supply As A Choice Among Latent Jobs," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 134-151, February.
    5. Clauss, Markus & Schnabel, Reinhold, 2008. "Distributional and behavioural effects of the German labour market reform," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 41(4), pages 431-446.
    6. Guyonne Kalb & Rosanna Scutella, 2003. "New Zealand Labour Supply from 1991-2001: An Analysis Based on a Discrete Choice Structural Utility Model," Treasury Working Paper Series 03/23, New Zealand Treasury.
    7. François Bourguignon & Amedeo Spadaro, 2006. "Microsimulation as a tool for evaluating redistribution policies," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 4(1), pages 77-106, April.
    8. Salvador Barrios & Mathias Dolls & Anamaria Maftei & Andreas Peichl & Sara Riscado & Janos Varga & Christian Wittneben, 2019. "Dynamic Scoring Of Tax Reforms In The European Union," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(1), pages 239-262, January.
    9. Clauss, Markus & Schnabel, Reinhold, 2008. "Distributional and behavioural effects of the German labour market reform," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 41(4), pages 431-446.
    10. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2014. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the United States: New Results," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(3), pages 723-838.
    11. Anna Kurowska & Michal Myck & Katharina Wrohlich, 2012. "Family and Labor Market Choices: Requirements to Guide Effective Evidence-Based Policy," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1234, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    12. Löffler, Max & Peichl, Andreas & Siegloch, Sebastian, 2013. "Validating Structural Labor Supply Models," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79819, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. Loeffler, Max & Peichl, Andreas & Pestel, Nico & Siegloch, Sebastian & Sommer, Eric, 2014. "Documentation IZA?MOD v3.0: The IZA Policy Simulation Model," IZA Discussion Papers 8553, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Tim Callan & A. Van Soest & John R. Walsh, 2007. "Tax Structure and Female Labour Market Participation: Evidence from Ireland," Papers WP208, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    15. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2012. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the US: New Results," Working Papers halshs-00805736, HAL.
    16. John Creedy & Guyonne Kalb, 2005. "Discrete Hours Labour Supply Modelling: Specification, Estimation and Simulation," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 697-734, December.
    17. van Soest, Arthur & Das, Marcel & Gong, Xiaodong, 2002. "A structural labour supply model with flexible preferences," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 107(1-2), pages 345-374, March.
    18. van Soest, A.H.O. & Das, J.W.M. & Gong, X., 2000. "A Structural Labor Supply Model with Nonparametric Preferences," Other publications TiSEM 5e6f370d-3e08-48be-8a44-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Alan Duncan & Mark N. Harris, 2002. "Simulating the Behavioural Effects of Welfare Reforms Among Sole Parents in Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 78(242), pages 264-276, September.
    20. Thoresen, Thor O. & Vattø, Trine E., 2015. "Validation of the discrete choice labor supply model by methods of the new tax responsiveness literature," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 38-53.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revinw:v:56:y:2010:i:1:p:186-214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iariwea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.