IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/vuw/vuwcpf/20918.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Atkinson Inequality Measure and Inequality Aversion

Author

Listed:
  • Creedy, John

Abstract

This paper examines the precise way in which the Atkinson inequality measures varies as inequality aversion increases. The aim is to investigate whether precise conditions can be obtained under which a tax reform might be judged to be inequality reducing for one range of aversion parameters, and inequality increasing for another range. A number of elasticities, with respect to inequality aversion, are derived and shown to have convenient interpretations. Specific conditions cannot be produced because the Atkinson measure can take the same value for a range of alternative distributions. Nevertheless, intersecting profiles of Atkinson measures plotted against inequality aversion can arise without the need for pathological assumptions about changes in the income distribution. The analysis shows the need to consider a range of aversion parameters when examining changes to the tax and transfer system. By considering only one or two values, it could be concluded incorrectly that a tax reform is progressive, when a higher degree of inequality aversion would judge a change to be regressive.

Suggested Citation

  • Creedy, John, 2019. "The Atkinson Inequality Measure and Inequality Aversion," Working Paper Series 20918, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    • Handle: RePEc:vuw:vuwcpf:20918
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ir.wgtn.ac.nz/handle/123456789/20918
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Creedy, 2017. "A note on inequality-preserving distributional changes," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(1), pages 86-95, January.
    2. John Creedy, 2016. "Interpreting inequality measures and changes in inequality," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 177-192, August.
    3. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    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. John Creedy, 2023. "Comparing Income Distributions Using Atkinson's Measure of Inequality," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(1), pages 141-155, March.
    2. John Creedy & S. Subramanian, 2023. "Exploring A New Class of Inequality Measures and Associated Value Judgements: Gini and Fibonacci-Type Sequences," Sankhya B: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Springer;Indian Statistical Institute, vol. 85(1), pages 110-131, May.

    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. Creedy, John, 2019. "The Atkinson Inequality Measure and Inequality Aversion," Working Paper Series 8015, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    2. John Creedy, 2023. "Distributional Comparisons Using the Gini Inequality Measure," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(4), pages 538-550, December.
    3. Creedy, John, 2021. "Comparing Income Distributions Using Atkinson’s Measure of Inequality," Working Paper Series 9469, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    4. Creedy, John, 2021. "Distributional Comparisons Using the Gini Inequality Measure," Working Paper Series 9471, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    5. John Creedy, 2023. "Comparing Income Distributions Using Atkinson's Measure of Inequality," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(1), pages 141-155, March.
    6. John Creedy & Norman Gemmell & Loc Nguyen, 2018. "Income Inequality in New Zealand, 1935–2014," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 51(1), pages 21-40, March.
    7. Guillaume Saint-Jacques & Amir Sepehri & Nicole Li & Igor Perisic, 2020. "Fairness through Experimentation: Inequality in A/B testing as an approach to responsible design," Papers 2002.05819, arXiv.org.
    8. Ashantha Ranasinghe & Xuejuan Su, 2023. "When social assistance meets market power: A mixed duopoly view of health insurance in the United States," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(4), pages 851-869, October.
    9. Eckstein, Zvi & Zilcha, Itzhak, 1994. "The effects of compulsory schooling on growth, income distribution and welfare," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 339-359, July.
    10. Roobavannan, M. & Kandasamy, J. & Pande, S. & Vigneswaran, S. & Sivapalan, M., 2020. "Sustainability of agricultural basin development under uncertain future climate and economic conditions: A socio-hydrological analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    11. Alessandro Spiganti, 2022. "Wealth Inequality and the Exploration of Novel Alternatives," Working Papers 2022:02, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    12. Günther Rehme, 2007. "Education, Economic Growth and Measured Income Inequality," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(295), pages 493-514, August.
    13. Junyi Zhu, 2014. "Bracket Creep Revisited - with and without r > g: Evidence from Germany," Journal of Income Distribution, Ad libros publications inc., vol. 23(3), pages 106-158, November.
    14. Juan Antonio Duro & Jordi Teixidó-Figueras & Emilio Padilla, 2017. "The Causal Factors of International Inequality in $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 Emissions Per Capita: A Regression-Based Inequality Decomposition Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(4), pages 683-700, August.
    15. Jeni Klugman & Francisco Rodríguez & Hyung-Jin Choi, 2011. "The HDI 2010: new controversies, old critiques," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(2), pages 249-288, June.
    16. Vani K. Borooah, 2013. "A general measure of the ‘effective’ number of parties in a political system," Chapters, in: Francisco Cabrillo & Miguel A. Puchades-Navarro (ed.), Constitutional Economics and Public Institutions, chapter 8, pages 146-159, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Francesco Andreoli & Eugenio Peluso, 2016. "So close yet so unequal: Reconsidering spatial inequality in U.S. cities," Working Papers 21/2016, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    18. Andonie, Costel & Kuzmics, Christoph & Rogers, Brian W., 2019. "Efficiency-based measures of inequality," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 60-69.
    19. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4543 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:8:y:2005:i:4:p:1-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. B. Essama‐Nssah & Peter J. Lambert, 2009. "Measuring Pro‐Poorness: A Unifying Approach With New Results," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 55(3), pages 752-778, September.
    22. Koen Decancq, 2020. "Measuring cumulative deprivation and affluence based on the diagonal dependence diagram," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 78(2), pages 103-117, August.

    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:vuw:vuwcpf:20918. 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: Library Technology Services (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fcvuwnz.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.