IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

International income distribution: comparing new ICP and the existing data


  • Rati Ram


Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide a comparison of data on real (purchasing-power-parity – PPP) gross domestic product (GDP) per capita recently released by International Comparison Program (ICP) with the numbers reported in World Development Indicators (WDI) and Penn World Tables (PWT) which have been used by hundreds, perhaps thousands, of researchers over many years. Design/methodology/approach - A descriptive comparison is first provided by listing cases of largest absolute and percentage differences between ICP and WDI and PWT numbers. Second, well-recommended measures of cross-country inequality in real GDP per capita are computed, and inequality in terms of ICP data are compared with that based on WDI and PWT data. Findings - First, there are huge differences for numerous countries between the ICP numbers and the WDI and PWT data. Second, many of these differences are much larger than the highly publicized cases of China and India. Third, since ICP numbers are more accurate, existing WDI and PWT data are noted to substantially understate intercountry income inequality. Fourth, comparison of ICP with WDI shows a pattern which is similar to that indicated by a comparison of ICP and PWT. Fifth, the huge discrepancies in data provided by highly reputed sources, and used by numerous researchers, in such a prime indicator of economic and social well-being seem to reflect a notable phenomenon. Originality/value - First, this is apparently the only attempt to provide a comparison of the new ICP data on country-level real GDP per capita with that reported in the highly reputed and widely used WDI and PWT. Second, the enormous differences for numerous countries should suggest much caution to researchers in using the existing WDI and PWT data series. Third, the substantial understatement of intercountry income inequality by WDI and PWT data should be noteworthy. Fourth, although authors of WDI and PWT will probably identify reasons for the differences and reformulate their PPP data series, the present study may suggest need for some reflections on the context in which such large-scale discrepancies in a variable of primary economic and social significance have existed for many years.

Suggested Citation

  • Rati Ram, 2009. "International income distribution: comparing new ICP and the existing data," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 36(6), pages 652-658, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:ijsepp:v:36:y:2009:i:6:p:652-658

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.


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

    Cited by:

    1. Rati Ram, 2016. "PPP GDP Per Capita for Countries of the World: A Comparison of the New ICP Results with World Bank Data," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 1057-1066, July.
    2. David Warner & Prasada Rao & William E. Griffiths & Duangkamon Chotikapanich, 2011. "Global Inequality: Levels and Trends, 1993-2005," Discussion Papers Series 436, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    3. Rati Ram & Secil Ural, 2014. "Comparison of GDP Per Capita Data in Penn World Table and World Development Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 639-646, April.
    4. David Warner & D. S. Prasada Rao & William E. Griffiths & Duangkamon Chotikapanich, 2014. "Global Inequality; Levels and Trends, 1993–2005: How Sensitive are These to the Choice of PPPs and Real Income Measures?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(S2), pages 281-304, November.


    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:eme:ijsepp:v:36:y:2009:i:6:p:652-658. 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: (Virginia Chapman). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.