The absence of deprivation as a measure of social well-being: An empirical investigation
The generalised Lorenz criterion is widely used for making welfare comparisons within and across countries on the basis of their income distributions. Experimental studies have challenged this way of proceeding by showing that the principle of transfers, which underlies the generalised Lorenz criterion, does not meet with widespread agreement among the public that theorists would have expected. We propose to substitute the non-deprivation quasi-ordering introduced by Chakravarty (1997) for the generalised Lorenz criterion. This criterion is less demanding than the generalised Lorenz criterion as it builds on a weaker version of the principle of transfers and it is therefore more likely to be accepted by the public. We use income data from the Luxembourg Income Study for 17 countries in order to contrast the generalised Lorenz and the non-deprivation criteria. Although the non-deprivation quasi-ordering is less decisive than the generalised Lorenz criterion, it is shown that the former approximates the latter surprisingly well.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Brice Magdalou & Patrick Moyes, 2009.
"Deprivation, welfare and inequality,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(2), pages 253-273, February.
- Patrick Moyes & Brice Magdalou, 2007. "Deprivation, welfare and inequality," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00389600, HAL.
- Patrick Moyes & Brice Magdalou, 2009. "Deprivation, wellfare and inequality," Post-Print hal-00293356, HAL.
- Yoram Weiss & Chaim Fershtman, 1997.
"Social Status and Economic Performance: A Survey,"
University of Chicago - George G. Stigler Center for Study of Economy and State
139, Chicago - Center for Study of Economy and State.
- Beach, Charles M. & Chow, K. Victor & Formby, John P. & Slotsve, George A., 1994. "Statistical inference for decile means," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 161-167, June.
- Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
- Kaur, Amarjot & Prakasa Rao, B.L.S. & Singh, Harshinder, 1994. "Testing for Second-Order Stochastic Dominance of Two Distributions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(05), pages 849-866, December.
- Bishop, John A & Chakraborti, S & Thistle, Paul D, 1989. "Asymptotically Distribution-Free Statistical Inference for Generalized Lorenz Curves," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(4), pages 725-727, November.
- Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
- Charles M. Beach & Russell Davidson, 1983. "Distribution-Free Statistical Inference with Lorenz Curves and Income Shares," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(4), pages 723-735.
- Amiel,Yoram & Cowell,Frank, 1999. "Thinking about Inequality," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521466967, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:116:y:2012:i:1:p:75-79. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.