IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cjrecs/v17y2024i1p87-102..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Three types of income inequality: a comparison of left behind places and more developed regions in the EU

Author

Listed:
  • Alessandra Faggian
  • Alessandra Michelangeli
  • Kateryna Tkach

Abstract

Despite the growing interest in subjective inequality, little is known about the relation between this and more objective measures of inequality, especially in the light of regional disparities. This study focuses on the patterns of actual income inequality and two subjective measures in NUTS 2 EU regions. By accounting for multiple indicators of economic (under)performance, we show that actual inequality is positively related to people’s perceptions in left behind places, but not in more developed regions. Furthermore, both residents of less developed or—‘left behind’—regions and those of more developed regions exhibit a preference for lower levels of income inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Alessandra Faggian & Alessandra Michelangeli & Kateryna Tkach, 2024. "Three types of income inequality: a comparison of left behind places and more developed regions in the EU," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 17(1), pages 87-102.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cjrecs:v:17:y:2024:i:1:p:87-102.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cjres/rsad046
    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.

    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:oup:cjrecs:v:17:y:2024:i:1:p:87-102.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cjres .

    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.