IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ver/wpaper/60-2009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Preserving Dominance Relations Through Disaggregation: The Evil and the Saint

Author

Listed:
  • Alain Trannoy

    (EHESS, GREQAM-IDEP, Marseille)

  • Eugenio Peluso

    () (Department of Economics (University of Verona))

Abstract

Disaggregation arises when broad categories like households budget units are divided into elementary units as individual income recipients. We study the preservation of stochastic dominance for every order beyond two after disaggregation: If we observe a dominance relation among household income distributions, it is also true at the individual level. We find necessary and sufficient conditions satisfied by the common sharing rule adopted by households to divide the cake among individuals. The sharing function, which maps the household income into the outcome of the disadvantaged individual, must have derivatives of the same sign as the utility function characterizing the stochastic order of interest. In addition, the household has to follow a compensating rule, meaning that at the margin the distribution should be in favor of the disadvantaged individual.

Suggested Citation

  • Alain Trannoy & Eugenio Peluso, 2009. "Preserving Dominance Relations Through Disaggregation: The Evil and the Saint," Working Papers 60/2009, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ver:wpaper:60/2009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dse.univr.it//workingpapers/WP60.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anthony F. Shorrocks & James E. Foster, 1987. "Transfer Sensitive Inequality Measures," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(3), pages 485-497.
    2. 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.
    3. Foster, James E & Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1988. "Poverty Orderings," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 173-177, January.
    4. Foster, James E. & Shorrocks, Anthony F., 1988. "Inequality and poverty orderings," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(2-3), pages 654-661, March.
    5. Zheng, Buhong, 2000. " Poverty Orderings," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 427-466, September.
    6. Michel Le Breton & Eugenio Peluso, 2009. "Third-degree stochastic dominance and inequality measurement," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 7(3), pages 249-268, September.
    7. Markus Haas, 2007. "Do investors dislike kurtosis?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 7(2), pages 1-9.
    8. Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
    9. Fishburn, Peter C. & Willig, Robert D., 1984. "Transfer principles in income redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 323-328, December.
    10. Muliere, Pietro & Scarsini, Marco, 1989. "A note on stochastic dominance and inequality measures," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 314-323, December.
    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. M Denuit & L Eeckhoudt & O Jokung, 2013. "Non-differentiable transformations preserving stochastic dominance," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 64(9), pages 1441-1446, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sharing rule; Stochastic dominance; Disaggregation;

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:60/2009. 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: (Michael Reiter). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/isverit.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.