IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Measuring Changes in Multidimensional Inequality - An Empirical Application

Listed author(s):

During the past decade there has been a growing opinion of including more than an income perspective in the examination of inequality. As a result a broad theoretical literature on the subject of multidimensional inequality is present. This can mainly be divided into three different parts: item-by-item, non-aggregative and aggregative approach. However, there is hitherto no agreement over the measurement of inequality when each individual or household is characterized by a variety of attributes of wellbeing. In addition, there are less empirical examinations applying a multidimensional perspective to inequality. We apply three existing techniques, one from each of the mentioned strands of the theoretical literature, to the particular question of whether multidimensional inequality increased or decreased in Zambia between 1998 and 2004 using household indicators on expenditures, educational level, health status and land holdings. The purpose is to assess strengths and weaknesses of these theoretical methods in an empirical context and accordingly review their usefulness for measurement and policy analysis. Our examination points to that inequality comparisons taking interrelations between attributes into account repeatedly are at odds with comparisons of independent distributions. Consequently, if employing the item-by-item approach, at minimum, one should check the correlations between welfare distributions. The assessment of the aggregative approach show evidence of that different dimensions of wellbeing compensate and reinforce each other with respect to inequality in an empirical context. However, a majority of the results are very sensitive to the degree of substitution between attributes chosen. Sensitivity analyses and explicitness should thus accompany examinations of this kind. In applying a non-aggregative approach few combinations fulfill the required dominance conditions. Accordingly, generality and less imposed structure come at a cost. We conclude that the empirical usefulness of these existing techniques is reasonable as long as we stay aware of intrinsic weaknesses. Clearly, careful interpretations and analyzes involving more than one technique is constructive to portray multidimensional inequality.

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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Lund University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 2007:14.

in new window

Length: 41 pages
Date of creation: 18 Aug 2007
Handle: RePEc:hhs:lunewp:2007_014
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Department of Economics, School of Economics and Management, Lund University, Box 7082, S-220 07 Lund,Sweden

Phone: +46 +46 222 0000
Fax: +46 +46 2224613
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

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.:

in new window

  1. Basu, Kaushik & Foster, James E, 1998. "On Measuring Literacy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(451), pages 1733-1749, November.
  2. Sahn, David E. & Stifel, David C., 2000. "Poverty Comparisons Over Time and Across Countries in Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 2123-2155, December.
  3. François Bourguignon & Satya Chakravarty, 2003. "The Measurement of Multidimensional Poverty," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 1(1), pages 25-49, April.
  4. Jenkins, Stephen P & Lambert, Peter J, 1993. "Ranking Income Distributions When Needs Differ," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 39(4), pages 337-356, December.
  5. Gleb Koshevoy, 1997. "The Lorenz zonotope and multivariate majorizations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14.
  6. Chipman, John S., 1977. "An empirical implication of Auspitz-Lieben-Edgeworth-Pareto complementarity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 228-231, February.
  7. Xavier Ramos & Jacques Silber, 2005. "On The Application Of Efficiency Analysis To The Study Of The Dimensions Of Human Development," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 51(2), pages 285-309, June.
  8. C. C. Huang & D. Kira & I. Vertinsky, 1978. "Stochastic Dominance Rules for Multi-attribute Utility Functions," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 611-615.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:lunewp:2007_014. 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: (David Edgerton)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.