IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ver/wpaper/26-2005.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do redistributive schemes reduce inequality between individuals?

Author

Listed:
  • Eugenio Peluso

    (Dipartimento di Scienze economiche (Università di Verona))

  • Alain Trannoy

    (EHESS, GREQAM-IDEP)

Abstract

Redistribution schemes (taxes or benefits) are generally performed at the household level. The issue is to know whether intra-household inequality magnifies or hampers the redistributive effect of the transfers, when the policy-maker focuses on the inequality at the individual level. Depending on the type of the transfer, three properties capturing the idea that the more wealthy the household is, the more unequally it behaves, have been shown to matter. In the moving away approach, the deviation with the equal split make a difference, in the star-shaped approach, the average share counts while the marginal share is relevant for concavity. We complete the analysis by showing how these properties of the intra-household allocation may be recovered through a bargaining model of the household. Then, the DARA and DRRA properties of the utility function emerge as the key conditions for the recovery.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugenio Peluso & Alain Trannoy, 2005. "Do redistributive schemes reduce inequality between individuals?," Working Papers 26/2005, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ver:wpaper:26/2005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dse.univr.it/RePEc/ver/Wpaper/WP26.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dollar, David & Kraay, Aart, 2002. "Growth Is Good for the Poor," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 195-225, September.
    2. Moyes, Patrick, 1989. "Some classes of functions that preserve the inequality and welfare orderings of income distributions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 347-359, December.
    3. Ravallion, Martin, 2001. "Growth, Inequality and Poverty: Looking Beyond Averages," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 1803-1815, November.
    4. Le Breton, Michel & Moyes, Patrick & Trannoy, Alain, 1996. "Inequality Reducing Properties of Composite Taxation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 71-103, April.
    5. Haddad, Lawrence & Kanbur, Ravi, 1990. "How Serious Is the Neglect of Intra-Household Inequality?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(402), pages 866-881, September.
    6. Kanbur, Ravi & Haddad, Lawrence, 1994. "Are Better Off Households More Unequal or Less Unequal?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 445-458, July.
    7. Roth, Alvin E & Rothblum, Uriel G, 1982. "Risk Aversion and Nash's Solution for Bargaining Games with Risky Outcomes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 639-647, May.
    8. Helen Couprie & Eugenio Peluso & Alain Trannoy, 2005. "From household to individual’s welfare: does the Lorenz criteria still hold? Theory and Evidence from French Data," Department of Economics University of Siena 469, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    9. Eichhorn, Wolfgang & Funke, Helmut & Richter, Wolfram F., 1984. "Tax progression and inequality of income distribution," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 127-131, October.
    10. Blundell,R. W. & Preston,Ian & Walker,Ian (ed.), 1994. "The Measurement of Household Welfare," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521451956.
    11. Yaari, Menahem E, 1977. "A Note on Separability and Quasiconcavity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(5), pages 1183-1186, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Peluso, Eugenio & Trannoy, Alain, 2007. "Does less inequality among households mean less inequality among individuals?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 568-578, March.
    2. Marat Ibragimov & Rustam Ibragimov, 2007. "Market Demand Elasticity and Income Inequality," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 32(3), pages 579-587, September.
    3. Donni, Olivier & Molina, José Alberto, 2018. "Household Collective Models: Three Decades of Theoretical Contributions and Empirical Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 11915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Dipankar Purkayastha, 1999. "Patriarchal Monopoly and Economic Development," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 61-78.
    5. Dalgaard, Carl-Johan & Erickson, Lennart, 2009. "Reasonable Expectations and the First Millennium Development Goal: How Much Can Aid Achieve?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 1170-1181, July.
    6. 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.
    7. Nancy Birdsall, 2008. "Income Distribution: Effects on Growth and Development," Chapters, in: Amitava Krishna Dutt & Jaime Ros (ed.), International Handbook of Development Economics, Volumes 1 & 2, volume 0, chapter 48, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. 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.
    9. Jeremy Lise & Shannon Seitz, 2011. "Consumption Inequality and Intra-household Allocations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(1), pages 328-355.
    10. Lee, Jungmin, 2004. "Observable and Unobservable Household Sharing Rules: Evidence from Young Couples' Pocket Money," IZA Discussion Papers 1250, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Chakravarty, Satya R. & Sarkar, Palash, 2022. "A synthesis of local and effective tax progressivity measurement," MPRA Paper 115180, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. San Vicente Portes, Luis & Atal, Vidya & Juárez Torres, Miriam, 2019. "From households to national statistics: Macroeconomic effects of Women's empowerment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 286-294.
    13. Miet Maertens & Liesbeth Colen & Johan F. M. Swinnen, 2011. "Globalisation and poverty in Senegal: a worst case scenario?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 31-54, March.
    14. Ravallion, Martin & Chen, Shaohua, 2003. "Measuring pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 93-99, January.
    15. Anh Tuan Bui & Cuong Viet Nguyen & Thu Phuong Pham, 2017. "Poverty among ethnic minorities: the transition process, inequality and economic growth," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(31), pages 3114-3128, July.
    16. Carbonell-Nicolau, Oriol & Llavador, Humberto, 2018. "Inequality reducing properties of progressive income tax schedules: the case of endogenous income," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(1), January.
    17. Kalwij, A.S. & Verschoor, A., 2004. "How Good is Growth for the Poor? The Role of Initial Income Distribution in Regional Diversity in Poverty Trends," Other publications TiSEM 199ed5a4-ad69-4cf9-81d7-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Michael Grimm & Isabel Günther, 2007. "Growth and Poverty in Burkina Faso: A Reassessment of the Paradox," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 16(1), pages 70-101, January.
    19. Fosu, Augustin Kwasi, 2017. "Growth, inequality, and poverty reduction in developing countries: Recent global evidence," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 306-336.
    20. Thorat, Sukhadeo, 2011. "Growth, Inequality and Poverty Linkages during 1983-2005: Implications for Socially Inclusive Growth," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 66(1), pages 1-32.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Inequality; Intra-household Allocation; Household bargaining; Lorenz curve; Taxation schemes.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D10 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - General
    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies

    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:ver:wpaper:26/2005. 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: Michael Reiter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isverit.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.