Restricted and Unrestricted Dominance Welfare, Inequality and Povery Orderings
AbstractThis paper extends the previous literature on the normative links between the measurement of poverty, social welfare and inequality. We show how, when the range of possible poverty lines is unbounded above, a robust ranking of absolute poverty may be interpreted as a robust ranking of social welfare, and a robust ranking of relative poverty may be interpreted as a robust ranking of inequality for any order of stochastic dominance. This interpretation is also valid when the maximum poverty line is bounded and for certain orders of stochastic dominance, so long as social welfare and inequality judgements are “censored''. We also develop new criteria of restricted inequality dominance, and find that they warn against the use of some popular indices of relative poverty and censored inequality. Finally, we illustrate geometrically how the new criteria of restricted inequality dominance extends the ranking power of previously proposed dominance criteria.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Departement d'Economique de la Faculte d'administration à l'Universite de Sherbrooke in its series Cahiers de recherche with number 00-01.
Length: 46 pages
Date of creation: 2000
Date of revision:
Welfare; Inequality; Poverty; Stochastic Dominance;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
- D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Sutherland, Holly & Immervoll, Herwig & O'Donoghue, Cathal, 1999. "An introduction to EUROMOD," EUROMOD Working Papers EM0/99, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
- Hoy, M. & Davies, J., 1991.
"The Normative Significance of Using Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance in Comparing Income Distributions,"
1991-8, University of Guelph, Department of Economics.
- Davies James & Hoy Michael, 1994. "The Normative Significance of Using Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance in Comparing Income Distributions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 520-530, December.
- Thistle, Paul D., 1993. "Negative Moments, Risk Aversion, and Stochastic Dominance," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(02), pages 301-311, June.
- Whitmore, G A, 1970. "Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 457-59, June.
- Formby, John P. & Smith, W. James & Zheng, Buhong, 1999. "The coefficient of variation, stochastic dominance and inequality: A new interpretation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 319-323, March.
- Zheng, Buhong, 1997. " Aggregate Poverty Measures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(2), pages 123-62, June.
- Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
- Russell Davidson, 2006. "Stochastic Dominance," Departmental Working Papers 2006-19, McGill University, Department of Economics.
- Foster, James E. & Shorrocks, Anthony F., 1988. "Inequality and poverty orderings," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(2-3), pages 654-661, March.
- Jenkins, Stephen P & Lambert, Peter J, 1997. "Three 'I's of Poverty Curves, with an Analysis of UK Poverty Trends," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 317-27, July.
- Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
- Shorrocks, Anthony F & Foster, James E, 1987. "Transfer Sensitive Inequality Measures," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(3), pages 485-97, July.
- Clark, Stephen & Hemming, Richard & Ulph, David, 1981. "On Indices for the Measurement of Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(362), pages 515-26, June.
- Blackorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1978. "Measures of relative equality and their meaning in terms of social welfare," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 59-80, June.
- Dasgupta, Partha & Sen, Amartya & Starrett, David, 1973. "Notes on the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 180-187, April.
- Atkinson, A B, 1987. "On the Measurement of Poverty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 749-64, July.
- Chakravarty, Satya R., 1983. "A new index of poverty," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 307-313, December.
- Buhong Zheng, 1999. "On the power of poverty orderings," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 349-371.
- Donaldson, David & Weymark, John A, 1986. "Properties of Fixed-Population Poverty Indices," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(3), pages 667-88, October.
- Petr Hanel, 2003. "Impact Of Government Support Programs On Innovation By Canadian Manufacturing Firms," Cahiers de recherche 04-02, Departement d'Economique de la Faculte d'administration à l'Universite de Sherbrooke.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Luc Savard).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.