Abstract
This study measures unfair inequality in Brazil between 1995 and 2009. To achieve that, we used the statistical tool developed by Almås et al. (J Public Econ 95:488–499, 2011) and the concept of “responsibility-sensitive” fairness proposed by Bossert (Math Soc Sci 29:1–17, 1995), Konow (J Econ Behav Organ 31(1):13–35, 1996) and Cappelen and Tungodden (Fairness and the proportionality principle, Discussion paper SAM 31/2007. Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, 2007). The results indicate that the fairness level in Brazil remained unchanged throughout the analyzed period.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Most of these changes occurred after the second half of the 1990s. For further details on income distribution and poverty, see Neri (2006).
A criticism about this view is that inequality is not necessarily offensive or inoffensive; it can be just spurious. For this argument, see Formby et al. (1989).
Let \(C_{i}=\exp (\beta r_{i})\) and \(D_{i}=\exp (\gamma e_{i}+\epsilon _{i})\) , so \(f(r_{i},e_{i})=C_{i}D_{i}\). Then \(g(r_{i})/\sum _{j}g(r_{j})=n^{-1} \sum _{j}C_{i}D_{i}/(\sum _{h}n^{-1}\sum _{j}C_{h}D_{j})=C_{i}\sum _{j}D_{j}/ \sum _{h}C_{h}\sum _{j}D_{j}\). Since \(\sum _{j}D_{j}\) is a constant, this simplifies to \(C_{i}/\sum _{h}C_{h}\) (Almås 2008).
Based on the axioms of anonymity, scale invariance, generalized Pigou–Dalton and unfairism.
Calculated for \(y_{i}\ge 0,\forall i\). The unfairness Gini index can also be calculated from \(G^{U}={\frac{2}{n(n-1)\mu }}\sum _{i}iu_{i}\), which simplifies the computational procedure.
Denominated in 2009 Reais as in the deflation method proposed by Corseuil and Foguel (2002).
Defined as whether the observed municipality of residence is different from the one in which the individual was born.
We thank an anonymous referee for this observation.
Categories: (1) Lower Bottom: agricultural laborers, fishermen, lumberjacks, etc.; (2) Upper Bottom: blue-collar workers, janitors, security guards, etc.; (3) Middle Bottom: masons, electricians, joiners, etc.; (4) Middle Middle: regional sales representatives, traveling salespersons, low-level managers, etc.; (5) Middle Top: consultants, high-level managers, CEOs, etc.; and (6) Top: large owners, magistrates, university-level professionals, etc.
References
Aaberge R, Colombino U (2009) Accounting for family background when designing optimal income taxes: a microeconometric simulation analysis, IZA Discussion Papers 4598. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
Almås I, Cappelen A, Lind J, Sørensen E, Tungodden B (2011) Measuring unfair (in)equality. J Public Econ 95:488–499
Almås I (2008) Equalizing income versus equalizing opportunity: a comparison of the United States and Germany. Res Econ Inequal 16:129–156
Angrist J, Pischke J-S (2009) Mostly harmless econometrics: an empiricist’s companion. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Arneson R (1989) Equality and equal opportunity for welfare. Philos Stud 56:77–93
Arkes J (2010) Using unemployment rates as instruments to estimate returns to schooling. South Econ J 76(3):711–722
Azevedo J (2007) Avaliando a significância estatística da queda na desigualdade no Brasil. In: Barros R, Foguel M, Ullysea G (Orgs) Desigualdade de renda no Brasil: uma análise da queda recente. IPEA, Brasília
Barros R, Mendonça R (1995) A evolução do bem-estar, pobreza e desigualdade no Brasil ao longo das últimas décadas—1960/1990. Pesquisa e Planejamento Econômico 25(1):115–164
Betts J, Roemer J (2005) Equalizing opportunity for racial and socioeconomic groups in the United States through educational finance reform. Department of Economics UCSD, paper 2005’14.
Belzil C, Hansen J (2002) Unobserved ability and the return to schooling. Econometrica 70(5):2075–2091
Bossert W (1995) Redistribution mechanisms based on individual characteristics. Math Soc Sci 29:1–17
Bossert W, Fleurbaey M (1996) Redistribution and compensation. Soc Choice Welfare 13:343–355
Bourguignon F, Ferreira F, Menéndez M (2007) Inequality of opportunity in Brazil. Rev Income Wealth 53:585–618
Cappelen A, Tungodden B (2007) Fairness and the proportionality principle, Discussion paper SAM 31/2007. Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration
Checchi D, Peragine V (2010) Inequality of opportunity in Italy. J Econ Inequal 8(4):429–450
Corseuil C, Foguel M (2002) Uma sugestão de deflatores para rendas obtidas a partir de algumas pesquisas domiciliares do IBGE. Mercado de Trabalho- Conjuntura e Análise 1(19):1–8
Cruz L, Moreira M (2005) On the validity of econometric techniques with weak instruments inference on returns to education using compulsory school attendance laws. J Human Resour 40(2):393–410
Davidson R, Duclos J-Y (2000) Statistical inference for stochastic dominance and for the measurement of poverty and inequality. Econometrica 68:1435–1464
Devooght K (2008) To each the same and to each his own: a proposal to measure responsibility-sensitive income inequality. Economica 75:280–295
Dworkin R (1981) What is equality? Part 2: equality of resources. Philos Public Aff 10:185–246
Fernández-Kranz D, Paul M, Rodríguez-Planas N (2011) PT status, type of contract, and the returns to experience, IZA Discussion Papers. Berlin, p 5815
Figueiredo E, Ziegelmann F (2009) Mudança na distribuição de renda brasileira: significância estatística e bem estar econômico. Revista de Economia Aplicada 13:257–277
Formby J, Seaks T, Smith W (1989) On the measurement and trend of inequality: a reconsideration. Am Econ Rev 79(1):256–264
Fleurbaey M, Maniquet F (2011) Compensation and responsibility. In: Arrow K, Sen A, Suzumura K (eds) Handbooks in economics: social choice and welfare, vol II. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Konow J (1996) A positive theory of economic fairness. J Econ Behav Organ 31(1):13–35
Manski C, Pepper J (2000) Monotone instrumental variables, with an application to the returns to schooling. Econometrica 68(4):997–1012
Neri M (2006) Desigualdade, estabilidade e bem-estar social. EPGE-FGV: Ensaios Econômicos, p 637
O’Neill B, Sweetman D, Van de gaer D (2001) Equality of opportunity and kernel density estimation: an application to intergenerational mobility. In: Fomby T, Hill C (eds) Applying kernel and nonparametric estimation to economic topics. Advances in Econometrics, vol 14. JAI Press, Stanford
Pastore J, Silva N (1999) Mobilidade social no Brasil. Makron Books, São Paulo
Ramos C, Santana R (2003) Quão pobres são os pobres? Brasil: 1991–2001, Texto para Discussão, UNB
Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Roemer J (1998) Equality of opportunity. Harvard University Press, New York
Roemer J, Aaberge R, Colombino U, Fritzell J, Jenkins S, Lefranc A, Marx I, Page M, Pommer E, Ruiz-Castillo J, Tranaes T, Trannoy A, Wagner G, Zubiri I (2003) To what extent do fiscal regimes equalize opportunities for income acquisition among citizens. J Public Econ 87:539–565
Sachsida A, Loureiro P, Mendonçça M (2004) Um estudo sobre retorno em escolaridade no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Economia 58(2):249–265
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Figueiredo, E., da Silva Netto Junior, J.L. More equal but not so fair: an analysis of Brazilian income distribution from 1995 to 2009. Empir Econ 46, 1325–1337 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-013-0714-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-013-0714-5