IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v48y2024i2p303-328..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wage-led or profit-led: is it the right question to examine the relationship between income inequality and economic growth? Insights from an empirical stock-flow consistent model for Denmark

Author

Listed:
  • Mikael Randrup Byrialsen
  • Sebastian Valdecantos
  • Hamid Raza

Abstract

For the last two decades an increasing number of empirical studies have analysed the relationship between income inequality and economic growth by classifying economies as either wage-led or profit-led. However, some critiques have claimed that rather than being unequivocally wage-led or profit-led, the growth regime of an economy might depend on the circumstances and the nature of the processes that determine income distribution. Using an empirical stock-flow consistent (SFC) model estimated for Denmark for 2005–2020 we run eight scenarios simulating changes in policy, structural and institutional variables to see how each affects income distribution and, through it, the business cycle and economic growth. We find that the relationship between demand, growth and income distribution is highly dependent on the source of the shock affecting income shares, its impact on the other areas of the economy and the intensity of feedback effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikael Randrup Byrialsen & Sebastian Valdecantos & Hamid Raza, 2024. "Wage-led or profit-led: is it the right question to examine the relationship between income inequality and economic growth? Insights from an empirical stock-flow consistent model for Denmark," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 48(2), pages 303-328.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:48:y:2024:i:2:p:303-328.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bead054
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:cambje:v:48:y:2024:i:2:p:303-328.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.