This paper is an assessment of the approach suggested by Gary Fields for measuring inequality in an economy with high-income sector enlargement. This approach describes the change in inequality according to a U-pattern, instead of the inverted U-pattern described by other indices. We argue that Fields index is not consistent with Lorenz Dominant Criterion (LDC) because of its failure to adequately describe the distributive change due to rank preserving transfers. The properties of Fields' index and of the modified version of the index F2, the behaviour, the originality and the limits of this approach in inequality measurement are tested and briefly discussed.
Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics in its series Economics Technical Papers with number
964.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Dylan Sutherland) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Dylan Sutherland to update the entry or send us the correct address..
Related research
Keywords:
Find related papers by JEL classification: D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement