Search results

This study uses the autoregressive distributed lag model (ARDL) econometric approach to investigate empirically the effects of cryptocurrencies, the gold standard and traditional fiat money on global income inequality measured based on the Gini coefficient, and various ratios of income inequality distribution such as top 1 per cent, top 10 per cent, top 40 per cent and top 50 per cent.

The study uses the ARDL econometric approach.

The findings indicated that cryptocurrency and gold standard monetary systems contributed significantly to reducing global inequality of income and wealth distribution. Conversely, the traditional fiat money system contributes positively to global income and wealth inequality while also contributing significantly to their fluctuation.

This suggests that the fiat monetary system results in the coercive redistribution of income and wealth if governments pursue a social welfare policy. They must resolve this conflict between the current fiat monetary system and social policy by opting for an alternative monetary system such as cryptocurrency or gold standard. These alternative monetary systems offer the promise of resolving the income and wealth inequality associated with the traditional monetary system which are accompanied with the channels of inflation, lack of financial inclusion and debt creation, and to offer a more sustainable financial system.

The study recommends that monetary policy must be revisited to account for its direct effect on income and wealth redistribution to achieve social welfare goals.

This paper aims to estimate the global income distribution during the nineties using limited information. In a first stage, we obtain national income distributions considering a model with two parameters. In particular, we propose to use the so-called Lamé distributions, which are curved versions of the Sigh-Maddala and Dagum distributions. The main feature of this family is that they represent parsimonious models which can fit income data adequately with just two parameters and whose Lorenz curves are characterized by only one parameter. In a second stage, global and regional distributions are derived from a finite mixture of these families using population shares. We test the validity of the model, comparing it with other two-parameter families. Our estimates of different inequality measures suggest that global inequality presents a decreasing pattern mainly driven by the fall of the differences across countries during the course of the study period that offsets the increase in disparities within countries.

In large parts of the world, income inequality has been rising in recent decades. Other regions have experienced declining trends in income inequality. This raises the question of which mechanisms underlie contrasting observed trends in income inequality around the globe. To address this research question in an empirical analysis at the aggregate level, we examine a global sample of 73 countries between 1981 and 2010, studying a broad set of drivers to investigate their interaction and influence on income inequality. Within this broad approach, we are interested in the heterogeneity of income inequality determinants across world regions and along the income distribution. Our findings indicate the existence of a small set of systematic drivers across the global sample of countries. Declining labour income shares and increasing imports from high-income countries significantly contribute to increasing income inequality, while taxation and imports from low-income countries exert countervailing effects. Our study reveals the region-specific impacts of technological change, financial globalisation, domestic financial deepening and public social spending. Most importantly, we do not find systematic evidence of education’s equalising effect across high- and low-income countries. Our results are largely robust to changing the underlying sources of income Ginis, but looking at different segments of income distribution reveals heterogeneous effects.

The catch word “Globalization” has been defended by advocates for lifting people out of poverty and the inequality in the world. But it has been criticized by opponents for failing to solve the problem of poverty, inequality, and for increasingly creating wealth disparity. This raises the question. The fact is that the contemporary world exhibits very high levels of inequality of income and wealth both between countries and within countries. Wealth inequality is more pronounced than that of income inequality across the globe and within-countries. Evidence suggests that rising inequality and wealth disparity arising out of globalization drive is choking off the potential benefits to the poor. In this backdrop, a composite assessment has been made in the present chapter to answer the question “whether globalization with its particular ideology, the market fundamentalism has benefited many and whether the performance on the distributional front has really been impressive.” From facts and evidence, the study finds that inequalities in income and wealth, also in wages have widened in many developed, developing developed, and developing countries. Technological change and globalization are their main sources.

As elsewhere, inequality has increasingly been on the agenda in recent years in Denmark, which has led to discussion about the redistributive role of welfare states across existing welfare regimes. Perhaps surprisingly, the Danish debate on inequality has revolved more specifically around how the country's tax system influences labour supply, especially the high level of marginal income taxation. The debate on poverty and inequality has become more prominent in Denmark in recent years, with a focus on the living standards of pensioners and children as well as the dynamic relationship between inequality and social policy. Thus, if there is a willingness to reduce inequality, a central challenge is to determine which instruments are available to counter rising inequalities in Denmark. In this context, the interaction between the issue of poverty and political support for specific social policies in Denmark is a challenge. Overall, the analysis suggests that tax reforms focusing on labour market supply have helped increase inequalities, thus indicating a possible trade-off between different aspects of welfare state development. Furthermore, the universality of the Danish model might be questioned in the coming years, which might also imply a debate on the generosity of a number of social security benefits, including those targeting the unemployed.

This chapter assesses the extent to which historical levels of inequality affect the creation and survival of businesses over time. To this end, we use the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor survey across 66 countries over 2005–2011. We complement this survey with data on income inequality dating back to early 1800s and current institutional environment, such as the number of procedures to start a new business, countries’ degree of financial inclusion, corruption and political stability. We find that, although inequality increases the number of firms created out of need, inequality reduces entrepreneurial activity as in net terms businesses are less likely to be created and survive over time. These findings are robust in using different measures of inequality across different points in time and regions, even if excluding Latin America, the most unequal region in the world. Our evidence then supports theories that argue early conditions, crucially inequality, influence development path.

Does education still serve as a great equalizer today? Does today’s worldwide expansion of schooling foster a global economic convergence? These questions need fresh answers at this time of growing concern over inequality. Past studies have abundantly documented the effects of schooling on within-country inequality, but we know little about corresponding effects on between-country inequality. We fill this gap by drawing on two innovations. The first is to formulate a theory of global inequality that integrates international differences in both the quantity and quality of education. The second, methodological, innovation is to propose and apply a method for decomposing trends in global inequality in GDP in terms of five social forces that include the quantity and quality of schooling. Analyses focus on the 1990–2010 period. The results confirm the continued salience of education: Trends in education account for as much as 80% of the 1990–2010 decline in between-country GDP inequality. However, we find a declining significance of “quantity” over “quality.” In sum, education remains salient as a global equalizer but its salience increasingly depends on bridging international differences in school quality.

Purpose: This chapter aims to study the issue of technological inequality in the modern world economy from the position of assessment of the scale of global conflict and the scenario of its development depending on conflict management.

Design/methodology/approach: The performed review of literature sources has shown that they provide an insufficient scientific basis for determining the level of technological inequality in the modern world economy from the position of assessment of the scale of the global conflict and scenarios of its development depending on conflict management. To fill this gap in the system of scientific knowledge, we use the method of comparative and correlation analysis of statistical data. The research objects are China and the United States, as well as other countries of the world that have the highest level of technological development, trade, and digitalization.

Findings: This chapter provides a review of factors that determine scientific arguments in favour of technological inequality of countries, which leads to a global conflict. Many forms of inequality have a socio-economic character and are connected to access to the main services (healthcare, education, or accommodation), as well as incomes and access to the sources of income, especially in the sphere of employment. The deficit of decent work and inequality turned the COVID-19 pandemic from the crisis of public healthcare into the crisis of employment and social conflict, which influenced the subsistence of millions of employees. There is a real risk that without comprehensive and well-coordinated political actions, the increase in inequality and reduction of general progress in the labour sphere will be preserved in many dimensions. There’s a need for the measures of international policy to provide developing countries with access to vaccines and financial support, including through restructuring of debts.

Originality/value: It is proved that after the creation of the UN, the nature of conflicts and violence underwent serious changes. Conflicts take fewer human lives but last longer, and the frequency of conflicts between groups within a country is higher than the frequency of international conflicts. In certain parts of the world, crimes on a gender basis are increasing in numbers. Besides, technologies allow using robots, drones, cyberattacks, viruses, and hackers for military purposes. At the same time, international cooperation is weak, similar to the global ability to prevent and regulate conflicts and all possible forms of violence. Technological progress changes the character of the development of conflicts. Achievements in the sphere of AI and machine learning will play an important role in this process of transformation, so the character of threats from the government and non-government subjects will change. The use of AI raises the precision of cyberattacks and physical and biological attacks, making the identification of attackers very difficult.

Information and communication technology (ICT) has the potential to address and reduce income inequality. However, since 1980, income inequality in the United States has caused concerns for researchers, policymakers and the public. Entrepreneurs and managers can take advantage of information technologies, while those in the middle and the bottom see fewer benefits. Meanwhile, countries such as Iceland are more capable of using ICT infrastructure to reduce income inequality, which contributes to the well-being of its citizens. This research study explores the relationship between infrastructure diffusion and income inequality through Rogers’s diffusion of innovations theory.

To answer the research questions, the author assessed the data through a series of regression analyses using SPSS. The authors used Power BI software to chart the relationships between ICT infrastructure diffusion and income inequality by country and in the United States by state and region.

The results show diffusion of innovations theory’s tenets do not necessarily hold, because a significant negative relationship exists between infrastructure diffusion and income inequality, especially in countries with emerging economies. In the United States, this relationship significantly differs by region.

This research contributes to research by expanding economic and sociology work to the IS domain, while providing conflicting evidence for diffusion of innovations theory. The research also provides suggestions for practice, such as more focused ICT infrastructure investments and regulations.

Until the 2008 Crash, the prevailing economic orthodoxy, accepted across the broad political spectrum, was that inequality was a necessary condition for economic health. The evidence of the last four decades is that this trade-off theory – that you can have more equal or more efficient economies but not both – is incorrect. Not only do excessive concentrations of income and wealth bring social dislocation and breed public discontent with democratic institutions, but a number of studies have shown that inequality on today’s scale brings slower growth and greater economic turbulence. Although there is now a broad acceptance amongst global leaders that inequality poses significant risks for social cohesion and economic stability, there has been little or no action to match the high level verbal war against inequality. As a result, inequality has carried on rising within nations since 2008. In the United Kingdom, the gap between the top and bottom has continued to widen, in part because post-2010 governments have weakened the pro-equality role of the state. Tackling inequality is now one of the most pressing issues of the day – an economic as well as a social imperative – while reversing this four decade long trend will require a major restructuring of the pro-market economic models in place across most of the rich world.