IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v138y2016icp96-99.html

Giving Gini direction: An asymmetry metric for economic disadvantage

Author

Listed:
  • Bowden, Roger J.

Abstract

A high Gini coefficient could signal either dispersion or else skewness, often of more social concern. Supplementary metrics such as the Atkinson index diagnose the asymmetry with preassigned parameters that reflect user social values. An alternative is proposed that reflects redistribution aspirations as they might be seen by the subjects themselves. The resulting v-metric has a dollar redistribution dimension. The metric, essentially a form of double averaging, can be simplified in terms of means of the left and right entropic distribution shifts, with the partition entropy reflecting implied partition into incomes above or incomes below.

Suggested Citation

  • Bowden, Roger J., 2016. "Giving Gini direction: An asymmetry metric for economic disadvantage," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 96-99.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:138:y:2016:i:c:p:96-99
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2015.11.037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176515005030
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.11.037?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shorrocks, A F, 1980. "The Class of Additively Decomposable Inequality Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(3), pages 613-625, April.
    2. George Deltas, 2003. "The Small-Sample Bias of the Gini Coefficient: Results and Implications for Empirical Research," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(1), pages 226-234, February.
    3. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    4. David E. A. Giles, 2004. "Calculating a Standard Error for the Gini Coefficient: Some Further Results," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 66(3), pages 425-433, July.
    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. Walter Kraemer & Holger Dette, 2016. "Beyond Inequality: A Novel Measure of Skewness and its Properties," CESifo Working Paper Series 5972, CESifo.
    2. Mario Schlemmer, 2021. "Including the asymmetry of the Lorenz curve into measures of economic inequality," Papers 2108.03623, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2022.
    3. Bowden, Roger J. & Posch, Peter N. & Ullmann, Daniel, 2018. "Income distribution in troubled times: Disadvantage and dispersion dynamics in Europe 2005–2013," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 36-40.
    4. Bowden, Roger J., 2017. "Distribution spread and location metrics using entropic separation," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 148-153.

    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. Stéphanie Souche & Aurelie Mercier & Nicolas Ovtracht, 2016. "The impacts of urban pricing on social and spatial inequalities: The case study of Lyon (France)," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(2), pages 373-399, February.
    2. Oscar Volij, 2018. "Segregation: theoretical approaches," Chapters, in: Conchita D’Ambrosio (ed.), Handbook of Research on Economic and Social Well-Being, chapter 21, pages 480-503, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Casilda Lasso de la Vega & Ana Urrutia & Oscar Volij, 2011. "An Axiomatic Characterization Of The Theil Inequality Order," Working Papers 1103, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    4. Guido Erreygers & Roselinde Kessels, 2017. "Socioeconomic Status and Health: A New Approach to the Measurement of Bivariate Inequality," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-23, June.
    5. Zandvakili, Sourushe, 2000. "Dynamics of earnings inequality among female-headed households in the United States," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 73-89.
    6. Tugce, Cuhadaroglu, 2013. "My Group Beats Your Group: Evaluating Non-Income Inequalities," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-49, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    7. Thomas Hoehn & Marc Reichle, 1986. "Einkommensdisparitäten im Zentren-Peripherie-Kontext in der Schweiz," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 122(II), pages 143-161, June.
    8. Teixidó Figueras, Jordi & Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio, 2012. "Ecological Footprint Inequality: A methodological review and some results," Working Papers 2072/203168, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    9. Satya Paul, 1999. "The Population Sub‐Group Income Effects on Inequality: Analytical Framework and an Empirical Illustration," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 75(2), pages 149-155, June.
    10. Hoy, Michael & Huang, Rachel J., 2017. "Measuring discrimination using principles of stochastic dominance," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 39-52.
    11. Marrero,Gustavo Alberto & Rodríguez,Juan Gabriel & Van Der Weide,Roy, 2021. "Does Race and Gender Inequality Impact Income Growth ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9865, The World Bank.
    12. Salvatore Barbaro & Anna-Sophie Kurella, 2025. "Dichotomous Preferences: Concepts, Measurement, and Evidence," Working Papers 2506, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    13. Caetano, Gregorio & Maheshri, Vikram, 2019. "Gender segregation within neighborhoods," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 253-263.
    14. Camacho Cuena, Eva & Neugebauer, Tibor & Seidl, Christian, 2005. "Compensating justice beats leaky buckets: an experimental investigation," Economics Working Papers 2005-06, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    15. Vani K. Borooah & John Mangan, 2012. "Mistaking Style for Substance," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 13(3), pages 266-287, June.
    16. Jose Maria Sarabia & Francisco Azpitarte, 2012. "On the relationship between objective and subjective inequality indices and the natural rate of subjective inequality," Working Papers 248, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    17. Sorger, Gerhard & Stark, Oded, 2013. "Income redistribution going awry: The reversal power of the concern for relative deprivation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-9.
    18. Lorena Remuzgo & Jose Maria Sarabia, 2015. "A general factorial decomposition of the second Theil index of inequality with applications in environmental economics," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(2), pages 1369-1378.
    19. Nicole Palan, 2010. "Measurement of Specialization – The Choice of Indices," FIW Working Paper series 062, FIW.
    20. Kleiber, Christian, 2001. "Corrigendum to "The Existence of Population Inequality Measures": [Economics Letters 57 (1997) 39-44]," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 429-429, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    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:eee:ecolet:v:138:y:2016:i:c:p:96-99. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.