This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Adult Equivalence Scales, Inequality and Poverty in New Zealand

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
John Creedy
Catherine Sleeman () (New Zealand Treasury)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

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.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

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

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
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

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Geraldine Bruin).

Related research
Keywords: Inequality; poverty; equivalence scales; living standard; income unit;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare and Poverty - - - General Welfare
I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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.:
  1. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Banks, James & Johnson, Paul, 1994. "Equivalence Scale Relativities Revisited," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 883-90, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Cowell, Frank A, 1984. "The Structure of American Income Inequality," Review of Income and Wealth, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 351-75, September.
  4. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Orazio P. Attanasio & Tullio Jappelli, 2000. "The life cycle hypothesis and consumption inequality," IFS Working Papers W97/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  6. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Richard Blundell & Ian Preston, 1994. "Income or consumption in the measurement of inequality and poverty?," IFS Working Papers W94/12, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  8. 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. [Downloadable!]
  9. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  10. Danziger, Sheldon & Taussig, Michael K, 1979. "The Income Unit and the Anatomy of Income Distribution," Review of Income and Wealth, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 25(4), pages 365-75, December.
  11. 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. [Downloadable!]
  12. Plotnick, Robert, 1981. "A Measure of Horizontal Inequity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(2), pages 283-88, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  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. 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. [Downloadable!]
  15. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Creedy, John & van de Ven, Justin, 2001. "Decomposing Redistributive Effects of Taxes and Transfers in Australia: Annual and Lifetime Measures," Australian Economic Papers, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(2), pages 185-98, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. Foster, James & Greer, Joel & Thorbecke, Erik, 1984. "A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 761-66, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  18. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  19. Richard Blundell & Ian Preston, 1997. "Consumption, inequality and income uncertainty," IFS Working Papers W97/15, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    Other versions:
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. John Creedy & Catherine Sleeman, 2005. "Excise Taxation in New Zealand," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 929, The University of Melbourne. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Use the JEL tree to browse through the database by subfields.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-4.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.