IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipe/ipetds/1339.html

O Ritmo de Queda na Desigualdade no Brasil é Adequado? Evidências do Contexto Histórico e Internacional

Author

Listed:
  • Sergei Suarez Dillon Soares

Abstract

Este texto utiliza duas abordagens para responder se o ritmo de queda da desigualdade no Brasil está adequado ou não. A primeira é comparar o ritmo de queda no coeficiente de Gini no Brasil com a queda no mesmo indicador em alguns países hoje pertencentes à Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Econômico (OCDE) - Espanha, Estados Unidos, França, Noruega, Países Baixos, Reino Unido e Suécia - , enquanto os mesmos construíam seus estados de bem-estar social durante o século passado. A segunda é calcular por quanto tempo o Brasil deverá manter o mesmo ritmo de queda para alcançar os níveis de desigualdade hoje observados em alguns países da OCDE que podem servir como referência: o Canadá, os Estados Unidos e o México. Os dados indicam que o ritmo de queda da desigualdade no Brasil de 0,7 ponto de Gini ao ano é superior ao ritmo que todos os países analisados seguiram enquanto construíam seus estados de bem-estar social, salvo a Espanha, cujo ritmo foi um pouco superior (0,9 ponto ao ano). Por seu turno, as distâncias que nos separam dos países-referência escolhidos são seis anos para o México, 12 para os Estados Unidos, e 24 anos para o Canadá. A conclusão geral do estudo é que o ritmo de queda na desigualdade é adequado, mas que o desafio será manter este ritmo por várias décadas para alcançar o nível de desigualdade, por exemplo, do Canadá. The following study uses two approaches to judge whether inequality in Brazil is falling fast enough. The first is to compare the variation of the Gini coefficient in Brazil with what was observed in several countries that today belong to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) - France, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, and United States - while they built their social welfare systems during the last century. The second approach is to calculate for how long Brazil must keep up the fall in the Gini coefficient to attain the same levels of inequality of three OECD countries that can be used as a reference: Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The data indicate that the Gini coefficient in Brazil is falling 0.7 point per year and that this is superior to the rhythm of all the OECD countries analyzed while they built their welfare systems but Spain, whose Gini fell 0.9 point per year during the 1950s. The time needed to attain various benchmarks in inequality are: six years to Mexico, twelve to the United States and 24 to Canadian inequality levels. The general conclusion is that the speed with which inequality is falling is adequate, but the challenge will be to keep inequality falling at the same rate for another two or three decades.

Suggested Citation

  • Sergei Suarez Dillon Soares, 2008. "O Ritmo de Queda na Desigualdade no Brasil é Adequado? Evidências do Contexto Histórico e Internacional," Discussion Papers 1339, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
  • Handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1339
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/TDs/td_1339.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sergei Suarez Dillon Soares & Rafael Guerreiro Osorio, 2007. "Desigualdade e Bem-Estar no Brasil na Década da Estabilidade," Discussion Papers 1270, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    2. Neri, Marcelo Côrtes, 2006. "Desigualdade, estabilidade e bem-estar social," FGV EPGE Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 637, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil).
    3. A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), 2000. "Handbook of Income Distribution," Handbook of Income Distribution, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    4. Ricardo Paes de Barros & Mirela de Carvalho & Samuel Franco & Rosane Mendonça, 2006. "Uma Análise das Principais Causas da Queda Recente na Desigualdade de Renda Brasileira," Discussion Papers 1203, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    5. Ricardo Paes de Barros & Samir Cury & Gabriel Ulyssea, 2007. "A Desigualdade de Renda no Brasil Encontra-se Subestimada? Uma Análise Comparativa com Base na PNAD, na POF e nas Contas Nacionais," Discussion Papers 1263, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    6. Morrisson, Christian, 2000. "Historical perspectives on income distribution: The case of Europe," Handbook of Income Distribution, in: A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), Handbook of Income Distribution, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 217-260, Elsevier.
    7. Fabio Veras Soares & Sergei Soares & Marcelo Medeiros & Rafael G. Osório, 2006. "Programas De Transferências De Renda No Brasil: Impactos Sobre A Desigualdade," Anais do XXXIV Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 34th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 156, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    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. Luiz de Mello, 2009. "Brazil's Growth Performance: Achievements and Prospects," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2009-55, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Pedro H. G. Ferreira de Souza, 2012. "Poverty, Inequality and Social Policies in Brazil, 1995-2009," Working Papers 87, International Policy Centre.

    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. Pedro H. G. Ferreira de Souza, 2012. "Poverty, Inequality and Social Policies in Brazil, 1995-2009," Working Papers 87, International Policy Centre.
    2. Manso, Carlos Alberto & Barreto, Flávio Ataliba & de França, João Mário, 2010. "Retornos da Educação e o Desequilíbrio Regional no Brasil," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 64(2), June.
    3. Eva Militaru & Madalina Ecaterina Popescu & Amalia Cristescu & Maria Denisa Vasilescu, 2019. "Assessing Minimum Wage Policy Implications upon Income Inequalities. The Case of Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Heshmati, Almas, 2004. "Continental and Sub-Continental Income Inequality," IZA Discussion Papers 1271, IZA Network @ LISER.
    5. Heiko Müller & Caren Sureth, 2009. "Income tax statistics analysis: A comparison of microsimulation versus group simulation," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 2(1), pages 32-48.
    6. repec:osf:socarx:u8crb_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Anthony B. Atkinson & Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2011. "Top Incomes in the Long Run of History," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 3-71, March.
    8. Luis Angeles, 2007. "A proper farewell to Kuznets' hypothesi," Working Papers 2007_15, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    9. Amaral, Ernesto F. L. & Gonçalves, Guilherme Quaresma & Weiss, Christopher, 2014. "The impact of Brazil’s Bolsa Família Program on school attendance, age-grade discrepancy, and child labor, 2010," SocArXiv u8crb, Center for Open Science.
    10. David Bravo & Dante Contreras & Sergio Urzúa, 2002. "Poverty and Inequality in Chile 1990-1998: Learning from Microeconomic Simulations," Working Papers wp198, University of Chile, Department of Economics.
    11. Cem Baslevent & Meltem Dayoglu, 2005. "The Effect of Squatter Housing on Income Distribution in Urban Turkey," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(1), pages 31-45, January.
    12. Casanova, Luis. & Alejo, Javier., 2015. "El efecto de la negociación colectiva sobre la distribución de los ingresos laborales evidencia empírica para Argentina en los años dos mil," ILO Working Papers 994875473402676, International Labour Organization.
    13. Bourguignon, Francois, 2005. "The Effect of Economic Growth on Social Structures," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 27, pages 1701-1747, Elsevier.
    14. Thomas Fischer, 2012. "Inequality and Financial Markets - A Simulation Approach in a Heterogeneous Agent Model," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, in: Andrea Teglio & Simone Alfarano & Eva Camacho-Cuena & Miguel Ginés-Vilar (ed.), Managing Market Complexity, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 79-90, Springer.
    15. Francois, Joseph & Rojas-Romagosa, Hugo, 2005. "The Construction and Interpretation of Combined Cross-Section and Time-Series Inequality Datasets," CEPR Discussion Papers 5214, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Thomas Fischer, 2017. "Can Redistribution by Means of a Progressive Labor Income-Taxation Transfer System Increase Financial Stability?," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(2), pages 1-3.
    17. Gulati, Namrata & Ray, Tridip, 2016. "Inequality, neighbourhoods and welfare of the poor," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 214-228.
    18. Cruces, Guillermo & Gasparini, Leonardo, 2011. "Inequality in Education: Evidence for Latin America," WIDER Working Paper Series 093, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    19. Günther Rehme, 2011. "Endogenous Policy And Cross‐Country Growth Empirics," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 58(2), pages 262-296, May.
    20. Sanjit Dhami & Emma Manifold & Ali al‐Nowaihi, 2021. "Identity and Redistribution: Theory and Evidence," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 499-531, April.
    21. Dmitry I. Malakhov & Nikolay P. Pilnik & Igor G. Pospelov, 2015. "Stability of Distribution of Relative Sizes of Banks as an Argument for the Use of the Representative Agent Concept," HSE Working papers WP BRP 116/EC/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ipe:ipetds:1339. 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: Fabio Schiavinatto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipeaabr.html .

    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.