Investigating the Contribution Of Between Group Inequality in Overall Inequality Using Maximum Between-Group Inequality Approach: Urban and Rural Areas of Iran

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of Economics, University of Kurdistan

2 M.A. in Economics, University of Kurdistan

Abstract

Reviewing the literature of inequality decomposition by subgroups shows that between-group inequality (urban and rural areas) often accounts for a small share of total inequality. Therefore, in interpreting the result, researchers give less emphasis on designing appropriate policies for removing inequality across those areas. In this paper, we employed maximum between-group inequality approach for getting a better understanding of the importance and the role of between urban and rural areas inequality in overall inequality in Iran. The analyses have been done using annual data for 2004, 2008, 2012, and 2016 drawn from the Iranian Urban and Rural Household Income and Expenditure Survey. As expected, the results of conventional decomposition method (Theil index) show that inequality between urban and rural areas have a contribution of only 11.25 percent to the overall inequality. However, the results of maximum between-group inequality method show that the between-group inequality plays a more important role in overall inequality. In particular, the results of this technique show that the contribution of between-group inequality to the overall inequality is almost twice that obtained from conventional decomposition method. The important policy implication of the results is that economic policies aiming at reducing inequality should be much more concerned about this component of overall inequality in Iran. Furthermore, the findings of this paper reveal that overall inequality has been reduced after the implementation of Targeted Subsidies Reform in Iran.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Abounoori, E., Khoshkar, A., & Davoudi, P. (2013). Gini Coefficient Decomposition in Iran in Terms of Urban and Rural Areas. Journal of Economic Research (Tahghighat- E- Eghtesadi), 48(3), 1-12 (In Persion).
  2. Akita, T., & Miyata, S. (2017). Spatial inequalities in Indonesia, 1996–2010: A hierarchical decomposition analysis. Social Indicators Research, 1-24.
  3. Anand, S. (1983). Inequality and poverty in Malaysia: measurement and decomposition. The World Bank.
  4. Atkinson, A. B. (1970). On the measurement of inequality. Journal of economic theory, 2(3), 244-263.
  5. Beegle, K., Christiaensen, L., Dabalen, A., & Gaddis, I. (2016). Poverty in a rising Africa. The World Bank.
  6. Cowell, F. (2003). Theil, inequality and the structure of income distribution.LSE STICERD Research Paper, (67).
  7. Datt, G., & Walker, T. (2004). Recent evolution of inequality in East Asia, Applied Economics Letters, 11(2). 75-79.
  8. Elbers, C., Lanjouw, P., Mistiaen, J. A., & Özler, B. (2008). Reinterpreting between-group inequality. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 6(3), 231-245.
  9. FAO (2005). Equivalence Scales: General Aspects. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docs/up/easypol/325/equiv_scales_general_032en.pd
  10. Frankema, E.H.P (2006). A Theil decomposition of Latin American income distribution in the 20th century: Inverting the Kuznets curve?, Working Paper, No.12/06, University of Groningen.
  11. Grootaert, C. (1995). Structural change and poverty in Africa: A decomposition anakysis for Cote d'Ivoire. Journal of Development Economics, 47(2), 375-401.
  12. Hayashi, M., Kataoka, M., & Akita, T. (2014). Expenditure inequality in Indonesia, 2008–2010: A spatial decomposition analysis and the role of education. Asian Economic Journal, 28(4), 389-411.
  13. Jamshidi,R ., & Salimifar,M . (2013). Study and comparison of rural and urban household income distribution in Khorasan Province and country during 2007-2012. Agricultural Economics & Development, 27(3), 253-266 (In Persion).
  14. Kanbur, R. (2006). The policy significance of inequality decompositions. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 4(3), 367-374.
  15. Mohammadi, A., Khanzadi, N., & Habibi, F. (2017). Decomposition of income inequality in Kurdistan province in terms of urban and rural areas. The Journal of Economic Policy, 9(18), 131-156 (In Persion).
  16. OECD (2009). What are equivalence scales?, Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/61/52/35411111. pdf.
  17. Oyekale, A. S., Adeoti, A. I., & Oyekale, T. O. (2006). Measurement and sources of income inequality in rural and urban Nigeria. PMMA Network Session Paper, 52-79.
  18. Paredes, D., Iturra, V., & Lufin, M. (2016). A spatial decomposition of income inequality in Chile. Regional Studies, 50(5), 771-789.
  19. Raghfar, H., & Ebrahimi, A. (2008). Income inequality in IRAN: 1984-2006. Social Welfare, 7(28), 9-34 (In Persion).
  20. Ranjbar Fallah, M. R., & Davoudi, P. (2013). Inequality decomposition: case study, urban and rural areas of Tehran province (during 2000-2007). Journal of Economic Research (Tahghighat- E- Eghtesadi), 48(4), 71-90 (In Persion).
  21. Sicular, T., Ximing, Y., Gustafsson, B., & Shi, L. (2007). The urban–rural income gap and inequality in China. Review of Income and Wealth, 53(1), 93-126.
  22. Shahnazi, R., Shahsavar, M. R., & Mobasheri, M. H. (2014). Income distribution and households' welfare before and after subsidies targeting. Social Welfare. 14 (54) :167-199 (In Persion).
  23. Theil, H., & Theil, H. (1967). Economics and information theory, Amsterdam: North Holland.
Quarterly Journal of Applied Theories of Economics
Volume 5, Issue 2 - Serial Number 17
September 2018
Pages 177-198

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics