IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/repsxx/v5y2017i3p256-265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fair and unfair inequality in China

Author

Listed:
  • John Knight

Abstract

The paper questions the normative value in the Chinese case of standard measures of aggregate income inequality such as the Gini coefficient. Evidence is adduced that people have narrow frames of reference and that they distinguish between income inequalities that they perceive to be fair and those that they perceive to be unfair. It is suggested that value judgements about what is fair or unfair can be guided by people’s own perceptions. People’s perceptions of unfairness can also be important to a government concerned to avoid social instability. The estimation of happiness functions can help to make the relevant distinctions. Examples are given of how fair and unfair inequalities might be identified, using either a criterion of people’s perceptions or one of informed judgements. Unfairness might be more strongly felt in inequalities of economic power than in inequalities of income, although the former can in turn result in inequalities of income. An argument is made for China researchers to extend inequality research and research instruments towards an economics of fairness and unfairness.

Suggested Citation

  • John Knight, 2017. "Fair and unfair inequality in China," Economic and Political Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3), pages 256-265, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:repsxx:v:5:y:2017:i:3:p:256-265
    DOI: 10.1080/20954816.2017.1345152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/20954816.2017.1345152
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/20954816.2017.1345152?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Knight, John & Gunatilaka, Ramani, 2022. "Income inequality and happiness: Which inequalities matter in China?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    2. Shi, Xinjie, 2022. "Inequality of opportunity in earnings in rural China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).

    More about this item

    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:taf:repsxx:v:5:y:2017:i:3:p:256-265. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/reps .

    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.