Welfare, inequality and the transformation of incomes the case of weighted income distributions
The paper extends previous results on welfare and inequality comparisons when incomes are weighted and the weights are not necessarily equal across the statistical units. A flexible approach to inequality measurement is allowed which admits as particular cases the relative and absolute views. We next identify the individualistic and symmetric transformations that generate and preserve the welfare and inequality rankings of income distributions. The former results fill a gap between the theoretical analysis and the practical measurement of welfare and inequality, while the latter results provide insights for the analysis of redistributive policies. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2002
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
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.:
- Moyes, Patrick, 1987. "A new concept of Lorenz domination," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 203-207.
- Udo Ebert & Patrick Moyes, 2000. "Adjusting Incomes for Needs: Can One Avoid Equivalence Scales?," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0917, Econometric Society.
- Bossert, Walter & Pfingsten, Andreas, 1990. "Intermediate inequality: concepts, indices, and welfare implications," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 117-134, April.
- Besley, Timothy J & Preston, I P, 1988. "Invariance and the Axiomatics of Income Tax Progression: A Comment," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 159-163, April.
- Harrison, Elizabeth & Seidl, Christian, 1994. "Perceptional Inequality and Preferential Judgements: An Empirical Examination of Distributional Axioms," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 79(1-2), pages 61-81, April.
- Dasgupta, Partha & Sen, Amartya & Starrett, David, 1973. "Notes on the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 180-187, April.
- Ebert, Udo & Moyes, Patrick, 2000. "Consistent Income Tax Structures When Households Are Heterogeneous," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 116-150, January.
- Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
- Amiel, Yoram & Cowell, Frank A., 1992. "Measurement of income inequality : Experimental test by questionnaire," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 3-26, February.
- Coral del RÎo & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2000. "Intermediate inequality and welfare," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 17(2), pages 223-239.
- Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
- Moyes Patrick, 1994. "Inequality Reducing and Inequality Preserving Transformations of Incomes: Symmetric and Individualistic Transformations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 271-298, August.
- Udo Ebert, 1999. "Using equivalent income of equivalent adults to rank income distributions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 16(2), pages 233-258.
- Moyes, Patrick, 1992. "The through-time redistributive effect of income taxation : The intermediate inequality view," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 59-71, August.
- Jakobsson, Ulf, 1976. "On the measurement of the degree of progression," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1-2), pages 161-168.