The redistributive impact of public and private social expenditure
Most analyses of social protection are focussed on public arrangements. However, social effort is not restricted to the public domain; all kinds of private arrangements can be substitutes to public programs. In fact, in several countries there has been a shift from public towards private social arrangements. OECD-data indicate that accounting for private social benefits has an equalising effect on levels of social effort across a number of countries. This suggests that public and private social expenditures are complementary to some extent. But their distributional effects differ. In all OECD countries, the social protection system causes a more equal distribution of incomes. Indeed, using cross-country data, we find a negative relationship between public social expenditures and income inequality and a positive relationship between public social expenditure and income redistribution. But we do not find a significant positive relationship between private social expenditures and income inequality or income redistribution. Consequently, changes in the public/private-mix in the provision of social protection may affect the redistributive impact of the welfare state.
|Date of creation:||2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Caminada, Koen & Goudswaard, Kees, 2004.
"Are public and private social expenditures complementary?,"
20179, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Koen Caminada & Kees Goudswaard, 2005. "Are Public and Private Social Expenditures Complementary?," International Advances in Economic Research, International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 11(2), pages 175-189, May.
- Gouyette, Claudine & Pestieau, Pierre, 1999. "Efficiency of the Welfare State," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 537-53.
- Koen Caminada & Kees Goudswaard, 2001.
"International Trends in Income Inequality and Social Policy,"
International Tax and Public Finance,
Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 395-415, August.
- Caminada, Koen & Goudswaard, Kees, 2001. "International trends in income inequality and social policy," MPRA Paper 20181, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Peter Gottschalk & Timothy M. Smeeding, 1997. "Cross-National Comparisons of Earnings and Income Inequality," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(2), pages 633-687, June.
- Anthony B. Atkinson, 2000. "The Changing Distribution of Income: Evidence and Explanations," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 1(1), pages 3-18, 02.
- Andrea Brandolini & Timothy M. Smeeding, 2007. "Inequality Patterns in Western-Type Democracies: Cross-Country Differences and Time Changes," CHILD Working Papers wp08_07, CHILD - Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic economics - ITALY.
- Willem Adema, 2001. "Net Social Expenditure: 2nd Edition," OECD Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers 52, OECD Publishing.
- Gottschalk, Peter & Smeeding, Timothy M., 2000. "Empirical evidence on income inequality in industrialized countries," Handbook of Income Distribution, in: A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), Handbook of Income Distribution, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 261-307 Elsevier.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:20178. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.