Search results

The present study aims to determine the existence of simultaneous relationship between economic growth, income inequality, fiscal policy, and total trade of the 13 emerging market economies as a group for the period 1980–2010. After establishing the existence of simultaneity between the above relationships, a simultaneous panel model has been formulated and estimated incorporating the nonlinearity among the variables as suggested by the existing literature. An inverted U-shape relationship is evident between (1) economic growth, income inequality, and total trade in economic growth equation, (2) income inequality, economic growth, and per capita income in income inequality equation, and (3) total trade and economic growth in total trade equation. Thus, the existence of a two-way nonlinear relationship is highlighted between economic growth, income inequality, and total trade. Apart from these nonlinear relationships, positive and significant effect of (1) gross capital formation, inflation, population growth, human capital, fiscal policy, monetary policy, and domestic credit to private sector on economic growth; (2) civil liabilities on income inequality; (3) gross capital formation and inflation on total trade; (4) total trade, population growth of those aged 65 years and above, political system on fiscal policy is highlighted. Also, negative and significant effect of (1) fiscal policy on income inequality and (2) income inequality on fiscal policy is revealed.

Using decomposable measures of inequality, the implications of household structure are investigated by examining inequality between and within household groups based on the number of exemptions, which correlates with household size, and the filing status, which correlates with the common forms of household structure, i.e. married, single, head of household. Detailed household income data are used to measure income inequality for both pre-tax/transfer and post-tax/transfer definitions of income. These decompositions provide information about the degree of inequality, both before and after taxes and transfers, which is due to household size and filing status. The bootstrap is employed to construct standard errors for the inequality measures and their decompositions, and hypothesis tests are conducted to determine whether the observed changes in the distribution of income are statistically significant.

This study examines the effect of digitalization on poverty and income inequality in developing countries. The study answers the question of whether digitalization is a way for developing countries to get out of poverty and income inequality.

The study uses data from 17 developing countries with data from 2005 to 2021. The study employs fully modified ordinary least squares (FMOLS) and dynamic ordinary least squares (DOLS), with an augmented mean group (AMG) for robustness. Digitalization, as the variable of interest, is proxied by the digitalization index (DI), constructed using principal component analysis (PCA). The dependent variables are poverty and income inequality, which are used in different models.

The evidence indicates that digitalization decreases poverty and income inequality in developing countries. These findings are justified when we use the AMG estimator, but the strength of the coefficients and significance levels are higher in the FMOLS and DOLS estimators. The results of the control variables also show that human development (LHDI), CO2 emissions and foreign direct investment (FDI) have decreasing effects on poverty and income inequality. Thus, digitalization is a good option for developing countries to get out of poverty and income inequality to achieve sustainable development goals (1&10).

This study provides rigorous empirical evidence on the effect of digitalization on poverty and income inequality in developing countries. Unlike the previous studies on developing countries, this study used a DI to proxy digitalization. In addition, the authors use FMOLS and DOLS estimators, with an AMG estimator for robustness, to provide long-run coefficients.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/IJSE-08-2023-0586

Limited research exists on the role of information access as a key success factor for rural entrepreneurs. The purpose of this study is to examine the importance of information access, among other inequality forms, in shaping entrepreneurial outcomes.

The authors used a qualitative, inductive research methodology. They conducted interviews with rural entrepreneurs and gained insights into the role of information access and basic tangible resources in shaping their ventures.

The authors identified two critical factors that impact rural entrepreneurs: inequalities in access to information and basic tangible resources. They found that inequalities in rural entrepreneurship are often interrelated, rather than isolated. The authors demonstrated that the relationship between entrepreneurship and inequality is not solely characterized by a positive or negative correlation but is a dynamic interplay where certain inequality forms may create barriers to opportunities for some individuals while creating opportunities for others.

The authors uncovered key barriers in rural entrepreneurship and constructed a roadmap to effectively address these challenges, providing valuable insights to policymakers and support initiatives and enabling the target of high-impact resources. This research supports efforts to provide rural entrepreneurs with equal opportunities to grow and succeed.

This research significantly contributes to the field by examining the complexities of entrepreneurship in emerging economies, with a particular focus on rural areas. The authors introduced a comprehensive conceptual model linking inequality and entrepreneurship, explored the challenges faced by rural entrepreneurs and offered strategic policy recommendations for development initiatives.

We investigate the role of fiscal policy, through several measures of government revenues and expenditures and redistribution, on disposable and market income inequality and economic growth as well as the interaction between inequality and growth for 31 European countries from 1995 to 2019.

We use a simultaneous equations model to assess the linkage between economic growth, inequalities and fiscal policy variables.

(1) While disposable income inequality has a negative effect on all fiscal policy variables, market income inequality has a mixed effects; (2) for Eastern European countries, public consumption and direct taxation positively influence economic growth; conversely, for Western European countries, the effects are negative; (3) disposable and market income inequality have a positive effect on growth for Eastern European countries, and a negative influence on growth for Western European countries; (4) growth contributes to the increase of disposable and market income inequality for Eastern European countries; for Western European countries, the effects are opposite; and (5) fiscal policy allows for the attenuation of disposable income inequality.

The different results between the role of market and disposable income inequality levels lead us to suggest tax progressivity as an important feature to consider when analyse the trivariate relationship between inequalities, fiscal policy and growth. Furthermore, there are different dynamics between inequality and growth, and the role of fiscal policy, on both Eastern and Western European countries.

The purpose of this paper is to extend the existing literature on cross‐country disparities by providing measures of cross‐country inequality in human development index (HDI) and real income per capita over the 30‐year period 1975‐2004.

A well‐recommended inequality index is applied to the data.

Ten points are noted: first, HDI inequality declined over the period; second, the pace of decline slowed somewhat since 1990; third, magnitude of HDI inequality has been quite small; fourth, inequality in gross domestic product per capita also shows a declining pattern over the period; fifth, there is very high correlation between HDI and per capita income; sixth, despite the high correlation, magnitudes of inequalities in the two variables are dramatically different; seventh, therefore, even very high correlation may not be interpreted as implying similar inequalities in the variables; eighth, cross‐country inequalities in various regions show huge differences; ninth, negative trend in inequalities over the period shows high statistical significance; and tenth, t‐tests for equality of means do not pick up well even huge differences in regional inequalities, suggesting need for considerable caution in the use of such tests.

The primary scientific significance of the work lies in providing the measures of cross‐country inequality in HDI over the 30‐year period; showing dramatically different inequalities in HDI and income despite very high correlation between the two variables; and indicating cross‐country inequalities in eight different regional groups and also across regions.

The size distribution of income, or income inequality, has long been a concern to scholars in many disciplines tor different reasons. Statisticians have approached the distribution of income among individuals as a stochastic process. Economists have sought to explain income distribution by means, of economic and institutional factors. More recently, economists have been interested in the effects of economic growth and government policies on income distribution. Sociologists and political scientists have thought of income inequality as a major source of social revolt or political violence.

The aim of this paper is to extend a theoretical model due to Ljungqvist and data from a sample of 19 developing economies to empirically test it.

Data for all variables are from the 2005 Human Development Report and the 2006 World Development Report. The author applies the least‐squares estimation technique in a multivariate linear regression.

Based on data from the World Bank and the United Nations Development Programme, the paper uses a sample of 19 developing economies and finds that cross‐country variations in income/consumption inequality may be explained by inequality of investment in human capital as measured by inequalities in child health as well as inequality in education and by inequality in the distribution of land as measured by the land Gini index.

Assuming a population consisting of skilled laborers, unskilled laborers, educators/health care personnel, and farmers, the paper shows that starting from an initial distribution of assets and in the absence of a perfect capital market along with human capital exhibiting increasing returns it is possible to have persistent inequality in the distribution of income or consumption. Regression results also are consistent with the theoretical implication of the model as the extent of inequality in land distribution and in access to education as well as inequalities in child health do linearly influence income or consumption inequality as measured by the ratio of the share of income or consumption accounted for by the richest quintile to that of the poorest quintile. As a result, if governments in developing countries aim to reduce inequality, they need to implement programs designed to reduce inequalities in child health by allowing children from the poorest of the poor to get fully immunized, which in turn would lead to a reduction in infant and child mortality and in education by providing low‐income families with means so that their children have better access to education. Government land policies, on the other hand, that succeed in reducing inequality in land distribution in developing countries, may be beneficial in terms of lessening income/expenditure inequality. Finally, while the present model does not test for the impact that improving capital markets would have, it stands to reason that improving capital markets could also have an impact on decreasing inequality.

In this paper the author uses a model due to Ljungqvist to show that individuals are relatively wealthy because they either own a fixed input such as land or they are able to invest in human capital, which in turn allow them to earn sufficient rent or labor income to remain wealthy. On the other hand, poor people either do not own land or are not capable of investing in human capital, and, as a result, earn low incomes and remain poor. This joint causation of factor endowment or human capital investment and income helps explain income distribution. Using data from the United Nations Development Programme and the World Bank for a sample of 19 developing economies, it is found that cross‐country variations in income/consumption inequality may be explained by inequality of investment in human capital as measured by inequalities in child health as well as well as inequality in education and by inequality in the distribution of land as measured by the land Gini index. These results will help governments in developing countries identify areas that need to be improved upon in order to reduce income/consumption inequality.

Exploiting a novel measure of hostile takeover exposure primarily based on the staggered adoption of state legislations, we explore a crucial, albeit largely overlooked, aspect of corporate social responsibility (CSR). In particular, we investigate CSR inequality, which is the inequality across different CSR categories. Higher inequality suggests a less balanced, more lopsided, CSR policy.

In addition to the standard regression analysis, we perform several robustness checks including propensity score matching, entropy balancing and an instrumental-variable analysis.

Our results show that more takeover exposure exacerbates CSR inequality. Specifically, a rise in takeover vulnerability by one standard deviation results in an increase in CSR inequality by 4.53–5.40%. The findings support the managerial myopia hypothesis, where myopic managers promote some CSR activities that are useful to them in the short run more than others, leading to higher CSR inequality.

Our study is the first to exploit a unique measure of takeover vulnerability to investigate the impact of takeover threats on CSR inequality, which is an important aspect of CSR that is largely overlooked in the literature. We aptly fill this void in the literature.

This chapter draws on biographical interviews to analyze identity-based interpretations of inequalities by disabled people in France, as these understandings are formed and transformed over the course of their lives. We combined the material from two different studies to create a corpus of 65 life stories from working-age people with contrasting impairments in terms of type, degree, and onset, as well as various profiles in terms of gender, race, and class. When talking about the inequalities they face, respondents commonly made use of identity labels (gender, class, race, disability), among those available in their micro and macro environments. They usually presented these categories as separate and cumulative, and only a few upper-class disabled women developed reflections in line with an intersectional model. This fragmentation of identity categories translated into the framing of each inequality encountered through a single lens. Respondents mentioned race, class, or gender mainly when evoking topics and contexts that the public debate highlights as problematic, while their references to disability covered a variety of disadvantages. Although the interview situation might have fueled this framing, we also showed that certain earlier socialization processes led people to believe that their disability was the source of the inequalities they encountered. Lastly, we identified three turning points that encourage shifts in the interpretation of inequalities; these are the availability of a new label to qualify one's experience, a competing identity-based interpretation for a mechanism, and access to a different, intersectional model of inequality.