Advertisement

European Journal of Law and Economics

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 129–163 | Cite as

A Computational Concept for Normative Equity

  • T. Kämpke
  • R. Pestel
  • F.J. Radermacher
Article

Abstract

The relative poverty concept of the European Union leads to a new approach for measuring equity and inequity in societies. The approach results from a differential equation for a one-parametric class of Lorenz curves. These allow to express societal inequity in terms of a so-called equity parameter. This parameter is not only of statistical or other, large-scale descriptive nature but it relates individual welfare to overall equity. The paper deals with the mathematical aspects, fitting questions, empirical findings, consequences for the middle class and some consequences for future growth processes aiming at more global equity and a sustainable development.

factor 10 income distribution index numbers and aggregation sustainable development world contract 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aaberge, R. (2000). Characterizations of Lorenz Curves and Income Distributions. ” Social Choice and Welfare. 17, 639–653.Google Scholar
  2. Bouchard, J.-P. & Mezard, M. (2000). Wealth Condensation in a Simple Model of Economy. ” Physica A. 282, 536ff.Google Scholar
  3. Chen, S. (2001). Private Communication, Worldbank, Washington.Google Scholar
  4. Cheong, K. S. (2002). An Empirical Comparison of Alternative Functional Forms for the Lorenz Curve. ” Applied Economics Letters. 9, 171–176. (Also available at www2.soc.hawaii.edu/econ/workingpapers/992.pdf)Google Scholar
  5. Chotikapanich, D. & Griffiths, W. E. (1999). Estimating Lorenz Curves Using a Dirichlet Distribuation, Working Paper 110, University of New England, Armidale.Google Scholar
  6. Dagan, N. & Volij, O. (2000). Formation of Nations in a Welfare-State Minded World. ” Journal of Public Economic Theory. 2, 157–181. (Also available at www.nirdagan.com/research/200002)Google Scholar
  7. Datt, G. (1998). Computational Tools for Poverty Measurement and Analysis, Discussion Paper 50, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington. Available at www.ifpri.cgiar.org/divs/fcnd/dp/dp50.htmGoogle Scholar
  8. European Parliament. (1999). The Fight Against Poverty in the ACP Countries and in the European Union, Working Document, Strassbourg. Available at www.europarl.eu.int/dg2/acp/stras99/en/genrep9.htm#ANNEX IGoogle Scholar
  9. Finland, Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Internet Presentation. Available at www.stm.fi/english/tao/ publicat/poverty/definit.htmGoogle Scholar
  10. Foster, J. E., Greer, J., & Thorbecke, E. (1984). A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures. ” Econometrica. 52, 761–766.Google Scholar
  11. Friewald-Hofbauer, T. & Scheiber, E. (2001). The Eco-Social Market Economy. Strategies for the Survival of Humankind, Vienna, Ökosoziales Forum Österreich.Google Scholar
  12. Ginther, D. K. (1995). A Nonparametric Analysis of the US Earning Distribution, Discussion Paper 1067–95, University of Wisconsin, Madison. Available at www.ssc.wisc.edu/irp/pubs/dp106795.pdfGoogle Scholar
  13. Greiner, C. & Radermacher, F. J. (1994). Reliable Data Concerning Factors of Critical Significance to the Living Conditions of Human Beings—An ‘Optimistic’ Modeling Approach. ” In Proc. Twelfth European Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research, Vienna.Google Scholar
  14. Information Society Forum. (2000). The European Way for the Information Society, Brussels, European Commission.Google Scholar
  15. Kakwani, N. & Pernia, E. M. (2000). What is Pro-Poor growth?” Asian Development Review. 18, 1–16.Google Scholar
  16. Leslie, R. (2000). Exploring the Gini Index of Inequality with DERIVE, Agnes Scott College, Decatur, Internet document. Available at http://ecademy.agnesscott.edu/?bleslie/index.htmGoogle Scholar
  17. Litchfield, J. A. (1999). Inequality: Methods and Tools, Discussion Paper, Worldbank, Washington. Available at www.worldbank.org/poverty/inequal/methods/litchfie.pdfGoogle Scholar
  18. Luxemboug, Center for Population, Poverty and Public Policy Policy Studies, “Luxembourg Income Studies, ” Differdange. Available at www.lis.ceps.lu/summary.htmGoogle Scholar
  19. Norway. (2000). Regional Policy. ” Brussels, Mission to the EU, Internet Presentation, ud2.mogul.no/cgibin/wbch3.exe?d=3551& p=2238.Google Scholar
  20. Penn. (2000). Penn World Table, The Center For International Comparisons, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Also available at www.pwt.econ.upenn.edu.Google Scholar
  21. Radermacher, F. J. (1999). Globalisierung, Informationsgesellschaft und nachhaltige Entwicklung—Hinweise zu einem Politikprogramm aus europaischer Sicht. ” Ulm, Universitätsverlag, Ulmensien, Band 13 Globalisierung und Soziale Marktwirtschaft, pp. 31–53.Google Scholar
  22. Radermacher, F. J. (2000) (Ed.). “Informationsgesellschaft und nachhaltige Entwicklung. ” Ulm, Universitätsverlag, FAW publication series Wissensverarbeitung und Gesellschaft.Google Scholar
  23. Radermacher, F. J. (2001). Balance or Destruction: Ein Plädoyer für eine weltweite öko-soziale Marktwirtschaft. Ökoeffizienz, weltweiter sozialer Ausgleich und geordnete weltweiteWachstumsprozesse als Schlüssel zu einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung. ” In Wuppertal, Proc. Nachhaltigkeit als Geschäftsfeld, Natur, Macht, Märkte.Google Scholar
  24. Radermacher, F. J. (2002). Balance oder Zerstörung— Öko-soziale Marktwirtschaft als Schlüssel zu einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung, Vienna, Ökosoziales Forum Österreich.Google Scholar
  25. Rasche, R. H., Gaffney, J., Koo, A. Y. C., & Obst, N. (1980). Functional Forms for Estimating the Lorenz Curve. ”Econometrica. 48, 1061–1062.Google Scholar
  26. Rawls, J. (1970). A Theory of Justice, Oxford, Oxford University Press, Theory Sketch. Available at www.commerce.usask.ca/faculty/backman/lectures/HCA434/Ethics/Ethics2/slide1.htmGoogle Scholar
  27. Schauer, T. (2000). Lifestyles, Future Technology and Sustainabile Development, Bonn, Protext, ISBN 3-929118-05-X.Google Scholar
  28. Schauer, T. & Radermacher, F. J. (2001) (Eds.). The Challenge of the Digital Divide, in Preparation. Also available at www.global-society-dialogue.orgGoogle Scholar
  29. Schluter, C. & Trede, M. (2000). Statistical Inference for Tail Behaviour of Lorenz Curves. Discussion Paper in Statistics and Econometrics 3/00, Universität KölnGoogle Scholar
  30. Schwartzman, S. (1998). The Statistical Measurement of Poverty. Working Paper. Available at www.un.org/Depts/unsd/statcom/rio.pdfGoogle Scholar
  31. Silber, J. (1999) (Ed.). Handbook of Income Inequality Measurement, Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  32. Strohm, J. (2000). Internationale Massnahmen zur nachhaltigen Entwicklung: Auswirkungen und Akzeptanz einesökonomisch, ökologisch und sozial ausgewogenen, weltweiten Ordnungsrahmens, Munich Verlag V. Florentz.Google Scholar
  33. UK Secretary of State for International Development (2000). Eliminating World Poverty: Making Globalization Work for the Poor, White Paper, full version. Available at www.globalisation.gov.ukGoogle Scholar
  34. United Nations Population Fund (2001). Current Population Issues Briefing Kit 2001. ”Washington. Available at www.unfpa.org/modules/briefkit/03.htmGoogle Scholar
  35. US Bureau of Census (2001). Current Population Survey CPS. ”Washington. Available at www.census.gov/hhes/www/income99.htmGoogle Scholar
  36. van Dijk, J., Pestel, R., & Radermacher, F. J. (1999). The EuropeanWay to the Global Information Society. ” The IPTS Report. 32, 10–16.Google Scholar
  37. Worldbank (2001). World Development Report 2000/2001. ” Washington. Available at www.worldbank.org/poverty/wdrpoverty/report/index.htmGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Kämpke
    • 1
  • R. Pestel
    • 2
  • F.J. Radermacher
    • 1
  1. 1.Forschungsinstitut für anwendungsorientierte Wissensverarbeitung FAWUlmGermany
  2. 2.EU Commission, Information Society Directorate GeneralBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations