IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/rwe111/v4y2013i2p1-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equality of Outcome or Equality of Opportunity? A Simulation of Wealth Distribution Using Agent-based Modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Ozgur Ekmekci

Abstract

Against the backdrop of calls for a more just form of capitalism, this paper specifically focuses on the notion of equality within capitalist societies and utilizes findings from a computer simulation to explore which of one two fundamental principles, namely: (1) equality of opportunity; or (2) equality of outcome might better inform and guide reform efforts to create more uniform distribution of wealth among members of society. In this study, Agent Based Modeling (ABM), as a form of computer simulation was used to explore how the fundamental principles of equality of opportunity or equality of outcome might impact wealth distribution in a capitalist society. A total of 800 simulations were run, where 400 of them incorporated the principle of equal opportunity and 400 incorporated the principle of equal outcome. Each of the 800 simulations covered a period of 5 years. The most interesting insight gained from this study is likely the finding that wealth distribution inequality is significantly lower if the distribution of wealth is grounded in the principle of equal opportunity, instead of being grounded in the principle of equal outcome. The other interesting finding is that the mean wealth, maximum wealth, and total wealth are all significantly higher if the distribution of wealth is grounded in the principle of equal opportunity, instead of being grounded in the principle of equal outcome. Both of these insights may initially seem somewhat counterintuitive, as one might expect that wealth distribution inequality be lower if members in society all received equal share of the resources upon which they stumbled. However, the findings of this study imply that equality of opportunity in a capitalist society might create a more even distribution of wealth, as well as a greater degree of prosperity for its members.

Suggested Citation

  • Ozgur Ekmekci, 2013. "Equality of Outcome or Equality of Opportunity? A Simulation of Wealth Distribution Using Agent-based Modeling," Research in World Economy, Research in World Economy, Sciedu Press, vol. 4(2), pages 1-11, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:jfr:rwe111:v:4:y:2013:i:2:p:1-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.php/rwe/article/view/2994/1772
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.php/rwe/article/view/2994
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caterina Calsamiglia, 2009. "Decentralizing Equality Of Opportunity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 50(1), pages 273-290, February.
    2. Dorfman, Robert, 1979. "A Formula for the Gini Coefficient," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 61(1), pages 146-149, February.
    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. Maxfield, Sean Alexander, 2021. "Anti-Meritocratic Economics in the Contemporary Era: The Issues with the Neoclassical Theory," OSF Preprints j9sgq, Center for Open Science.

    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. Guo Chen & Amy K Glasmeier & Min Zhang & Yang Shao, 2016. "Urbanization and Income Inequality in Post-Reform China: A Causal Analysis Based on Time Series Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, July.
    2. Saqalli, M. & Gérard, B. & Bielders, C.L. & Defourny, P., 2011. "Targeting rural development interventions: Empirical agent-based modeling in Nigerien villages," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(4), pages 354-364, April.
    3. Xiaotong Sun & Charalampos Stasinakis & Georigios Sermpinis, 2022. "Decentralization illusion in Decentralized Finance: Evidence from tokenized voting in MakerDAO polls," Papers 2203.16612, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    4. Saqalli, M. & Gérard, B. & Bielders, C. & Defourny, P., 2010. "Testing the impact of social forces on the evolution of Sahelian farming systems: A combined agent-based modeling and anthropological approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(22), pages 2714-2727.
    5. Sang T. Truong & Humberto Barreto, 2023. "Teaching Income Inequality with Data-Driven Visualization," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 68(1), pages 140-155, March.
    6. Theuri, Joseph & Olukuru, John, 2022. "The impact of Artficial Intelligence and how it is shaping banking," KBA Centre for Research on Financial Markets and Policy Working Paper Series 61, Kenya Bankers Association (KBA).
    7. Goldhaber, Dan & Choi, Hyung-Jai & Cramer, Lauren, 2007. "A descriptive analysis of the distribution of NBPTS-certified teachers in North Carolina," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 160-172, April.
    8. Wier, Mette & Birr-Pedersen, Katja & Jacobsen, Henrik Klinge & Klok, Jacob, 2005. "Are CO2 taxes regressive? Evidence from the Danish experience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 239-251, January.
    9. Diasakos, Theodoros M & Neymotin, Florence, 2013. "Coordination in Public Good Provision: How Individual Volunteering is Impacted by the Volunteering of Others," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-119, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    10. Simone Pellegrino, 2020. "The Gini Coefficient: Its Origins," Working papers 070, Department of Economics and Statistics (Dipartimento di Scienze Economico-Sociali e Matematico-Statistiche), University of Torino.
    11. Daniel Gerszon Mahler & Xavier Ramos, 2017. "Equality of opportunity for well-being," Working Papers 444, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    12. Martin Kaae Jensen, 2018. "Distributional Comparative Statics," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(1), pages 581-610.
    13. Jörg Franke, 2007. "Does Affirmative Action Reduce Effort Incentives? A Contest Game Analysis," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 711.07, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    14. Kazuhiko Kakamu, 2022. "Bayesian analysis of mixtures of lognormal distribution with an unknown number of components from grouped data," Papers 2210.05115, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    15. Sina Jahanshahi & Reza Kerachian & Omid Emamjomehzadeh, 2023. "A Leader-Follower Framework for Sustainable Water Pricing and Allocation," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 37(3), pages 1257-1274, February.
    16. Walter Piesch, 2005. "A look at the structure of some extended Ginis," Metron - International Journal of Statistics, Dipartimento di Statistica, Probabilità e Statistiche Applicate - University of Rome, vol. 0(2), pages 263-296.
    17. Daniel Gerszon Mahler & Xavier Ramos, 2019. "Equality of Opportunity in Four Measures of Well‐Being," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(S1), pages 228-255, November.
    18. Jörg Franke, 2010. "Does Affirmative Action Reduce Effort Incentives? – A Contest Game Analysis," Ruhr Economic Papers 0185, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    19. Yurko, Anna V., 2011. "How does income inequality affect market outcomes in vertically differentiated markets?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 493-503, July.
    20. Filippo Temporin, 2020. "How Does Deprivation Affect Early-Age Mortality? Patterns of Socioeconomic Determinants of Neonatal and Postneonatal Mortality in Bolivia," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(5), pages 1681-1704, October.

    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:jfr:rwe111:v:4:y:2013:i:2:p:1-11. 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: Gina Perry (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://rwe.sciedupress.com .

    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.