IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Adult Equivalence Scales, Inequality and Poverty in New Zealand

  • John Creedy
  • Catherine Sleeman

    ()

    (New Zealand Treasury)

This paper examines the sensitivity of inequality and poverty measures to the choice of adult equivalence scales and the type of income unit examined. Comparisons are made using parametric equivalence scales, and income units include individuals, equivalent adults and households. The results are based on HES data for total expenditure. A variety of equivalence scales, for New Zealand, Australia, the UK and the OECD are examined. The implications of varying the poverty line are also considered.

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: http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2004/04-21/twp04-21.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by New Zealand Treasury in its series Treasury Working Paper Series with number 04/21.

as
in new window

Length: 37 pages
Date of creation: Sep 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nzt:nztwps:04/21
Contact details of provider: Postal: New Zealand Treasury, PO Box 3724, Wellington, New Zealand
Phone: +64-4-472 2733
Fax: +64-4-473 0982
Web page: http://www.treasury.govt.nz

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.:

as in new window
  1. Foster, James & Greer, Joel & Thorbecke, Erik, 1984. "A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 761-66, May.
  2. André Decoster & Erwin Ooghe, 2002. "Weighting with individuals, equivalent individuals, or not weighting at all. Does it matter empirically?," Public Economics Working Paper Series ces0215, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Working Group Public Economics.
  3. Glewwe, Paul, 1991. "Household equivalence scales and the measurement of inequality : Transfers from the poor to the rich could decrease inequality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 211-216, March.
  4. Richard Blundell & Ian Preston, 1998. "Consumption Inequality And Income Uncertainty," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 113(2), pages 603-640, May.
  5. Jenkins, Stephen P & Cowell, Frank A, 1994. "Parametric Equivalence Scales and Scale Relativities," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 891-900, July.
  6. Orazio P. Attanasio & Tullio Jappelli, 2000. "The life cycle hypothesis and consumption inequality," IFS Working Papers W97/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  7. Cowell, Frank A, 1984. "The Structure of American Income Inequality," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 30(3), pages 351-75, September.
  8. John Creedy & Ivan Tuckwell, 2003. "Reweighting the New Zealand Household Economic Survey for Tax Microsimuilation Modelling," Treasury Working Paper Series 03/33, New Zealand Treasury.
  9. Richard Blundell & Ian Preston, 1994. "Income or consumption in the measurement of inequality and poverty?," IFS Working Papers W94/12, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  10. Coulter, Fiona A E & Cowell, Frank A & Jenkins, Stephen P, 1992. "Equivalence Scale Relativities and the Extent of Inequality and Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(414), pages 1067-82, September.
  11. John Creedy, 2002. "The GST and Vertical, Horizontal and Reranking Effects of Indirect Taxation in Australia," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 35(4), pages 380-390.
  12. Plotnick, Robert, 1981. "A Measure of Horizontal Inequity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(2), pages 283-88, May.
  13. Creedy, John, 1997. "Labour Supply and Social Welfare When Utility Depends on a Threshold Consumption Level," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 73(221), pages 159-68, June.
  14. Danziger, Sheldon & Taussig, Michael K, 1979. "The Income Unit and the Anatomy of Income Distribution," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 25(4), pages 365-75, December.
  15. Banks, James & Johnson, Paul, 1994. "Equivalence Scale Relativities Revisited," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 883-90, July.
  16. John Creedy & Rosanna Scutella, 2003. "The Role of the Unit of Analysis in Tax Policy Reform Evaluations," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2003n28, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
  17. Ebert, Udo, 1997. "Social Welfare When Needs Differ: An Axiomatic Approach," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(254), pages 233-44, May.
  18. Creedy, John & van de Ven, Justin, 2001. "Decomposing Redistributive Effects of Taxes and Transfers in Australia: Annual and Lifetime Measures," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 185-98, June.
  19. Decoster, Andre & Schokkaert, Erik & Van Camp, Guy, 1997. "Is redistribution through indirect taxes equitable?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 599-608, April.
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:nzt:nztwps:04/21. 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: (Web and Publishing Team, The Treasury)

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.