IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/lunewp/2007_014.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Changes in Multidimensional Inequality - An Empirical Application

Author

Listed:

Abstract

During the past decade there has been a growing opinion of including more than an income perspective in the examination of inequality. As a result a broad theoretical literature on the subject of multidimensional inequality is present. This can mainly be divided into three different parts: item-by-item, non-aggregative and aggregative approach. However, there is hitherto no agreement over the measurement of inequality when each individual or household is characterized by a variety of attributes of wellbeing. In addition, there are less empirical examinations applying a multidimensional perspective to inequality. We apply three existing techniques, one from each of the mentioned strands of the theoretical literature, to the particular question of whether multidimensional inequality increased or decreased in Zambia between 1998 and 2004 using household indicators on expenditures, educational level, health status and land holdings. The purpose is to assess strengths and weaknesses of these theoretical methods in an empirical context and accordingly review their usefulness for measurement and policy analysis. Our examination points to that inequality comparisons taking interrelations between attributes into account repeatedly are at odds with comparisons of independent distributions. Consequently, if employing the item-by-item approach, at minimum, one should check the correlations between welfare distributions. The assessment of the aggregative approach show evidence of that different dimensions of wellbeing compensate and reinforce each other with respect to inequality in an empirical context. However, a majority of the results are very sensitive to the degree of substitution between attributes chosen. Sensitivity analyses and explicitness should thus accompany examinations of this kind. In applying a non-aggregative approach few combinations fulfill the required dominance conditions. Accordingly, generality and less imposed structure come at a cost. We conclude that the empirical usefulness of these existing techniques is reasonable as long as we stay aware of intrinsic weaknesses. Clearly, careful interpretations and analyzes involving more than one technique is constructive to portray multidimensional inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Nilsson, Therese, 2007. "Measuring Changes in Multidimensional Inequality - An Empirical Application," Working Papers 2007:14, Lund University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:lunewp:2007_014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://project.nek.lu.se/publications/workpap/Papers/WP07_14.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen P. Jenkins & Peter J. Lambert, 1993. "Ranking Income Distributions When Needs Differ," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 39(4), pages 337-356, December.
    2. Anthony B. Atkinson & François Bourguignon, 1987. "Income Distribution and Differences in Needs," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: George R. Feiwel (ed.), Arrow and the Foundations of the Theory of Economic Policy, chapter 12, pages 350-370, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Gleb Koshevoy, 1997. "The Lorenz zonotope and multivariate majorizations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14.
    4. François Bourguignon & Satya R. Chakravarty, 2019. "The Measurement of Multidimensional Poverty," Themes in Economics, in: Satya R. Chakravarty (ed.), Poverty, Social Exclusion and Stochastic Dominance, pages 83-107, Springer.
    5. Basu, Kaushik & Foster, James E, 1998. "On Measuring Literacy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(451), pages 1733-1749, November.
    6. Sahn, David E. & Stifel, David C., 2000. "Poverty Comparisons Over Time and Across Countries in Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 2123-2155, December.
    7. Caterina Ruggeri Laderchi & Ruhi Saith & Frances Stewart, 2003. "Does it Matter that we do not Agree on the Definition of Poverty? A Comparison of Four Approaches," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 243-274.
    8. A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), 2000. "Handbook of Income Distribution," Handbook of Income Distribution, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    9. repec:bla:revinw:v:39:y:1993:i:4:p:337-56 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Chipman, John S., 1977. "An empirical implication of Auspitz-Lieben-Edgeworth-Pareto complementarity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 228-231, February.
    11. Xavier Ramos & Jacques Silber, 2005. "On The Application Of Efficiency Analysis To The Study Of The Dimensions Of Human Development," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 51(2), pages 285-309, June.
    12. C. C. Huang & D. Kira & I. Vertinsky, 1978. "Stochastic Dominance Rules for Multi-attribute Utility Functions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 45(3), pages 611-615.
    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. Koen Decancq & Maria Ana Lugo, 2008. "Setting Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Well-Being," OPHI Working Papers 18, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.

    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. Andrea Brandolini, 2008. "On applying synthetic indices of multidimensional well-being: health and income inequalities in selected EU countries," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 668, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    2. repec:pru:wpaper:24 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Leßmann, Ortrud, 2011. "Empirische Studien zum Capability Ansatz auf der Grundlage von Befragungen: Ein Überblick," UFZ Discussion Papers 4/2011, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    4. Alkire, Sabina & Santos, Maria Emma, 2014. "Measuring Acute Poverty in the Developing World: Robustness and Scope of the Multidimensional Poverty Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 251-274.
    5. Stephen P. Jenkins & John Micklewright, 2007. "New Directions in the Analysis of Inequality and Poverty," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 700, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    6. Kuklys, W. & Robeyns, I., 2004. "Sen’s Capability Approach to Welfare Economics," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0415, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Klasen, Stephan & Günther, Isabel, 2007. "Measuring Chronic Non-Income Poverty," Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Göttingen 2007 10, Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics.
    8. Fleurbaey, Marc & Hagnere, Cyrille & Trannoy, Alain, 2003. "Welfare comparisons with bounded equivalence scales," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 309-336, June.
    9. Christophe Muller & Alain Trannoy, 2003. "A Dominance Approach to Well-Being Inequality across Countries," IDEP Working Papers 0313, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France.
    10. Lungile Ntsalaze & Sylvanus Ikhide, 2018. "Rethinking Dimensions: The South African Multidimensional Poverty Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 195-213, January.
    11. Béassoum, Christian N., 2011. "Pauvreté régionale au Tchad en 2003: une situation de référence revisitée [Chad regional poverty profile in 2003: revisiting a baseline]," MPRA Paper 34505, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Jean-Yves Duclos & David Sahn & Stephen D. Younger, 2006. "Robust Multidimensional Poverty Comparisons with Discrete Indicators of Well-being," Cahiers de recherche 0628, CIRPEE.
    13. Permanyer, Iñaki, 2014. "Assessing individuals' deprivation in a multidimensional framework," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1-16.
    14. Jiantuo Yu, 2013. "Multidimensional Poverty in China: Findings Based on the CHNS," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 315-336, June.
    15. Heshmati, Almas, 2004. "Data Issues and Databases Used in Analysis of Growth, Poverty and Economic Inequality," IZA Discussion Papers 1263, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Sabina Alkire, Suman Seth, 2008. "Measuring Multidimensional Poverty in India: A New Proposal," OPHI Working Papers 15, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    17. Muller, Christophe & Trannoy, Alain, 2012. "Multidimensional inequality comparisons: A compensation perspective," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(4), pages 1427-1449.
    18. Tugce, Cuhadaroglu, 2013. "My Group Beats Your Group: Evaluating Non-Income Inequalities," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-49, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    19. Mussa, Richard, 2010. "Poverty and Inequality in Standards of Living in Malawi: Does Religious Affiliation Matter?," MPRA Paper 24438, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Hutchens, Robert M., 2012. "Measuring Segregation When Hierarchy Matters," IZA Discussion Papers 6667, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    21. Christophe Muller & Asha Kannan & Roland Alcindor, 2016. "Multidimensional Poverty in Seychelles," Working Papers halshs-01264444, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multidimensional inequality; inequality indices; stochastic dominance; expenditures; education; health; land holdings; Zambia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I19 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Other
    • I29 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Other
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment

    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:hhs:lunewp:2007_014. 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: Iker Arregui Alegria (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/delunse.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.