Exploring income variations across traditional authorities in KwaZulu‐Natal,South Africa

To understand income inequality and poverty, one must go beyond the important and much‐studied differences rural and urban living and investigate inequalities within rural areas. Using new South African data aggregated by ‘traditional authorities’, this article examines variations in per capita income across poor, rural, mostly black areas of KwaZulu‐Natal (KZN) province. The inequalities are significant. In explaining them, the article examines the importance of such variables as education, proportion of females in the resident population, population density, soil quality and rainfall. A geographical information system is used to map both the raw data and the residuals from a regression analysis, and this combination of statistical and geographical analyses yields new insights. Finally, the article suggests how these techniques might be supplemented by qualitative and quantitative studies of ‘overachieving’ and ‘underachieving’ traditional authorities ‐ those whose incomes per capita are well above or below what regression equations would predict.     

The political economy of income distribution in South Korea: The impact of the state's industrialization policies

A number of previous studies of economic growth and income distribution in South Korea, based largely on 1960s data, concluded that South Korea was an exception to Kuznets' ‘inverse U-pattern’ of income inequality. Also, it was regarded as an exception to the usual negative consequences predicted by dependency theory for an economy so dependent on foreign capital and world markets. This author presents more recent data — for the 1970s and early 1980s — in order to support his claim that the trend toward income equality that appeared in the 1960s was reversed in the 1970s. The author develops a thesis that stresses the role of the state in shaping the Korean political economy. He argues that it has been the strong South Korean developmentalist state in firm control of both domestic and foreign capital and its export-oriented industrialization policies that have been the principal determinant of the pattern of income distribution. He contests the usual explanation related to the level of economic development or external dependency per se.     

The rise and fall of worldwide income inequality, 1820–2035

The development process and the demographic changes that are a central element of it explain both the nearly two centuries of increasing income inequality prior to 2000 and the reversal of this trend that followed. There are at least four phases of the development process: (1) Malthusian pre-development, (2) initial growth, (3) improved productivity, and (4) receding growth. Prior to the industrial revolution, the entire world was in the Malthusian Phase 1. During 1820–1950, about 20 countries, mostly in Western Europe, North America, and Oceania, moved out of Phase 1 and began to grow more rapidly. But, per capita income levels in the rest of the world continued to stagnate and worldwide income inequality widened continuously for at least 150 years following the Industrial Revolution. Around 1960, developing countries began to escape the Malthusian trap and move into Phase 2 of development. By the latter part of the 20th century, many developing countries were achieving growth rates equal to or greater than the high-income countries, slowing the rise in inequality. By 2000–2015 most developing countries were in either Phases 2 or 3 of development, while most of the high-income countries were moving into Phase 4, leading to a sharp reduction in worldwide income inequality. The recent reductions in worldwide income inequality are likely to continue in the near term because of the continuation of the more favorable demographic changes in developing compared to high-income countries.     

Introduction to income inequalities and redistribution in china

This special section presents the main findings about long-run trends in inequality in China and its driving factors as they emerge from a country case study carried out under a UNU-WIDER supported project.¹ Special focus in the umbrella project were on three issues: (i) the role of earnings inequality and its determinants; (ii) the role of top incomes when administrative records or other sources can be combined with household surveys; and (iii) the redistributive impact of public policies. Main findings of the project including those for China results were presented in a special panel during the UNU-WIDER Think Development – Think WIDER development conference held in Helsinki in September 2018.²

1. Motivation

Inequality has once again emerged as a major issue in economic development across the developed and developing world, and addressing this challenge is key in the UN Sustainable Development Agenda. The UNU-WIDER conference on Mapping the Future of Development Economics held in Helsinki in September 2016³ led to the formulation of a project to study inequality in five major developing countries accounting for more than 40 per cent of the world’s population. UNU-WIDER implemented these studies under its Inequality in the Giants project,⁴ designed as part of a broader international effort to shed light on a set of new questions on between-country and within-country inequalities, by generating integrated datasets and applying a consistent methodology to investigate the determinants of inequality dynamics in some of the world’s largest economies. China was included among the five case countries, and the effort included both a series of papers on China, produced under the coordination of Professor Shi Li and various workshops and meetings. Coming to grips with inequality in China is an obvious priority for anyone interested in trends in global inequality; and the present special section contains five key papers produced in the context of the UNU-WIDER project and subsequently accepted for publication by the China Economic Review.

2. Content of the special section

The five papers on inequality in China presented in this special section cover different topics and jointly illustrate a key set of important themes in the recent evolution of China’s income distribution.The opening study by Luo, Li, and Sicular (LLS) provides an overview and analysis of the long-term evolution of inequality in China, while the next three papers — on urban wage inequality, public transfers, and top incomes — each illustrates and delves more deeply into important aspects of the broader trends in inequality.What are the main findings of these papers? The core finding is that inequality in China rose markedly from the 1980s through the early 2000s; only since 2008 has the upward trend stopped or reversed. LLS report and examine the underpinnings of this core finding, using the five waves of the China Household Income Project surveys conducted during 1988-2013. This paper also finds a considerable, ongoing reduction in rural poverty, and a poverty decomposition analysis indicates that this poverty reduction was mostly due to income growth rather than redistribution in rural areas.The second paper by Gustafsson and Wan (GW) is on urban wage inequality from 1988 to 2013 and it sheds further light on the changes in the distribution of wage earnings. The authors highlight that average wages have grown rapidly and that wage inequality increased until 2007. Moreover, age has become weaker and education stronger related with wage. Importantly, the gender wage gap once small widened rapidly between 1995 and 2007, and workers in foreign owned firm and the state sector enjoy a wage premium.While wages are the most important component of income, it is only part of the inequality story. One important additional question is the role of government taxes and transfers. Since the early 2000s, China has embarked on a major effort to put in place a universal social safety net. The study by Cai and Yue (CY), which is the third paper, assess the consequences of these efforts. Their key conclusions include that the same public policy may produce different redistributive implications. Moreover, if the government keeps increasing the social security transfer scale without changing its distribution, then inequality will increase in China. In addition, formal-sector pension takes up the biggest share and is the most un-equalizing sub-item of all social security transfers; and related to the first paper in the special section they argue that the government should spend more on Dibao and rural residents pension to reduce inequality.Arguably, income inequality measured using household survey data understates actual inequality because surveys have difficulty in capturing top incomes. In the Chinese case, concerns about such bias have increased in the past ten years due to the expansion of private wealth and growing numbers of super-rich. The fourth paper by Li, Li, and Wan (LLW) is on top incomes in China and it attempts to correct for this bias using income information for the Chinese super-rich from various sources. They conclude that the Gini coefficient of income inequality increases substantially when samples of top incomes are incorporated.Finally, Gradín and Wu (GW) analyse in the fifth and final study the distribution of income and expenditure in China in a telling comparative perspective with India. Both countries represent two extreme cases in the relationship of inequality using both wellbeing indicators. It emerges that the joint distribution of income and expenditure differs between China and India because there is a higher prevalence of people with a large mismatch between their ranks in income and consumption in India, especially in rural areas, and particularly amongst those reporting low income and high expenditure. The main compositional effects identified are the different demographic and geographical composition of the countries’ populations, mostly the smaller households (especially in rural areas) and the higher level of urbanization in China than in India. The lack of consistency of cross-country comparisons based on income or expenditure calls for the use of hybrid inequality measures combining data on both provided they are available in the same survey.

3. Concluding remarks

The studies brought together in this special section provide telling insights about the trends in inequality in China from which scholars and policy makers can learn a great deal. In a global perspective, further increases in China’s mean income and wealth, both now above the global means, will begin to raise global between-country inequality. This is important in and of itself. Moreover, while we cannot expect that all the world’s poorest countries will follow the same path as China considering that the initial conditions and the international context they face will be very different, the experiences from China do reinforce the observation that much can be done by policy to influence inequality outcomes. In particular, and as argued by Gradin, Leibbrandt, & Tarp, 2020 (forthcoming):“well-functioning labour markets that promote job-creation, decent pay and social inclusion, removing any legal or de facto discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity or place of origin, providing equal access to human and physical capital, and empowering the most disadvantaged population groups, are a key driver of increased equality”.These insights also emerge clearly from the five China studies in this special section.     

Does Rising Income Inequality Reduce Life Expectancy? New Evidence for 26 European Countries (1995–2014)

An open debate these days is about how national income inequality could affect individuals’ health outcomes. Therefore, the present study aims to provide new evidence regarding life expectancy determinants and how they are related to the income inequality hypothesis. Precisely, it is provided new evidence on this relationship for 26 European countries during the period 1995–2014. The analysis is based on panel data techniques, with the latest data from both Eurostat and the OECD Health Statistics. Furthermore, data from the World Bank is also applied. Besides, we have tested the sensitivity of the estimates in our empirical analysis using three clusters of countries. Our results suggest that income inequality does not significantly reduce health in developed societies, like the European ones. Notwithstanding, as income inequality can be sometimes harmful for population health, these issues must be taken into account in order to improve health care policies.     

Inequality in South Africa: The distribution of income,expenditure and earnings

This article empirically analyses the state of inequality in South Africa. International comparisons show South Africa to be among the most unequal countries in the world. The levels of income inequality and earnings inequality are analysed with a range of measures and methods. The results quantify the extremely high level of inequality in South Africa. Earnings inequality appears to be falling in recent years, with relative losses in the upper-middle parts of the earnings distribution. Decomposing income inequality by factor source reveals the importance of earnings in accounting for overall income inequality. The article concludes by observing that, internationally, significant sustained decreases in inequality rarely come about without policies aimed at achieving that, and suggests that strong policy interventions would be needed to reduce inequality in South Africa to levels that are in the range typically found internationally.     

Growth Patterns and Inequality in the Presence of Costly Technology Adoption

The stylized facts that motivate this article include the diversity in growth patterns that are observed across countries during the process of economic development and the divergence over time in income distributions both within and across countries. We construct a dynamic general equilibrium model in which technology adoption is costly and agents are heterogeneous in their initial holdings of resources. We interpret the adoption cost as the resources expended in acquiring skills associated with new technologies. Endogenous growth occurs in our model largely as a result of human capital deepening. The analytical results of the model characterize three growth outcomes associated with the technology adoption process depending on productivity differences between the technologies. These outcomes are labeled ‘poverty trap,’ ‘dual economy,’ and ‘balanced growth.’ The model is then capable of explaining the observed diversity in growth patterns in addition to the divergence of incomes over time and across countries.     

An Austrian view on the middle income trap

This paper intends to give a nuanced interpretation ‘the middle income trap’ in the discussion on China’s economic future. A developing nation gets ‘trapped’ when it reaches a relatively comfortable level of income but cannot take the step into the next level. In this paper, the usually made connection between income trap and the structure of economy is critically examined and the ‘trap’ is interpreted as a bearer of information in itself. According to the Austrian school of economics (Hayek), prices represent the sum of information that is available to the markets. Stagnating incomes will consequentially be read as information concerning the lack of growth of the productivity of the work force and the industry. The ‘middle income trap’ has to be addressed at microeconomic level, focusing on the increase of productivity. Usually, the trap cannot be addressed by government policies, but has to be solved by increased entrepreneurship.     

Level of Economic Development and Income Inequality: Evidence from the Postwar Developed World

Using a recent high-quality panel dataset on income distribution for 19 developed countries, the postwar relation between the level of economic development and income inequality is estimated in terms of several Kuznets-type specifications. Contrary to what one might expect on the basis of Kuznets's hypothesis, inequality does not decline with an increase in income even at such high levels of development, but shows an uninverted-U pattern that is characterized by an initial decline and a subsequent increase in income inequality. The estimates suggest that the position noted for the postwar United States is shared widely in the developed world.     

Does decentralization reduce income inequality? Only in rich states

We investigate the relationship between fiscal decentralization and income inequality using data from U.S. states over three and a half decades. Our study contributes to the literature in several ways in terms of empirical methodology and specification. First, we take into account integration and cointegration properties of the data and estimate the cointegrating relationship between fiscal decentralization and income inequality using Fully Modified Ordinary Least Squares, following Pedroni (2000). Second, we investigate the direction of the causality. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we investigate if the relationship between fiscal decentralization and income inequality is conditional on income in each state. We find that fiscal decentralization does reduce income inequality, but only in rich states. We also find that causality runs from fiscal decentralization to income inequality, not the other way around.     

Why has income inequality in Thailand increased?: An analysis using surveys from 1975 to 1998

This paper identifies the determinants of income inequality in Thailand, which increased between 1975 and 1998. Our regression results strongly suggest the significance of agricultural factors. We also obtain some limited evidence that sectoral factors, financial development, and education level disparities play a roughly equally important role in explaining inequality changes in Thailand.     

Unequal access to education and income distribution

Summary This paper attempts a new specification of the education variable in accounting for differences in income distribution in a cross-sectional analysis of 49 countries. The specification refers to the steepness of the educational pyramid, as measured by the coefficient of variation of enrolments within a given country. This variable alone explains 23 per cent of income inequality across countries (as measured by the Gini coefficient), while in the presence of it the traditional (catch-all) per capita income variable becomes insignificant.This finding indicates the importance of the supply side in relative income determination. It is also suggestive that a policy aiming at equalisation of access to the different levels of education might help in reducing income inequality.I would like to thank Arnold Anderson, Mary Jean Bowman, Jan Tinbergen and Peter Wiles for commenting on an earlier draft of this paper.     

中国经济如何跨越中高等收入陷阱

我国2010年人均GDP已经突破3945美元,根据世界银行对世界各经济体的最新分类标准,我国已经步入中高等收入国家行列,但与此同时我国的收入差距不断拉大。如何将收入差距控制在合理范围内,成功地跨越中高等收入陷阱是当前的紧要问题。本文通过对我国人均GDP及其基尼系数的协整检验发现,我国经济增长与收入分配之间存在一种稳定的长期均衡关系。只有合理的处理我国的收入分配差距问题才能达到经济的持续发展,从而跨越高中等收入陷阱。     

Trade openness and income inequality in China and the SAARC Region

The paper empirically examines the effects of trade liberalisation on income inequality in China and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation countries. Panel data analysis is conducted for the period of 1973 to 2012. The results show that liberal trade policies have increased income inequality in these countries. These results are robust to alternative liberalisation measures. The control variables used have differing effects on income distribution. Per capita income has an increasing effect on income inequality, while education, financial development, financial openness, democracy, and government size are shown to reduce income inequality. These outcomes can be expected to have important policy implications for the use of trade liberalisation in these countries.     

Inward and outward FDI and income inequality: evidence from Europe

This paper examines the effects of inward and outward FDI on income inequality in Europe using panel cointegration techniques and unbalanced panel regressions. Our main result is that both inward FDI and outward FDI have, on average, a negative long-run effect on income inequality. This result is robust to employing alternative estimation methods, controlling for potential outliers, using different measures of FDI and inequality, and changing the period and sample selection. Other findings are: (i) while the long-run effect of inward and outward FDI on income inequality is clearly negative, their short-run effect appears to be positive. (ii) Long-run causality runs in both directions, suggesting that an increase in inward and outward FDI reduces income inequality in the long run, and that, in turn, a reduction in inequality leads to an increase in inward and outward FDI. (iii) There are large cross-country differences in the long-run effects of inward and outward FDI on income inequality; for some countries the long-run effects on income inequality are positive.     

Inequality in China revisited. The effect of functional distribution of income on urban top incomes,the urban-rural gap and the Gini index, 1978–2015

Most analyses explain the increase in China's overall inequality during the reform period principally by means of the expansion of urban-rural income gap. This paper tries to state a relationship between functional distribution of income and China's Gini index. After presenting the main theoretical contributions that clarify the general relationship among those variables, we describe the mechanism that has connected them during the last decades in the Chinese economy. There exists a link between falling wage share, rising urban households' top incomes, urban-rural income gap and the Gini coefficient. These relationships are analysed for both the pre and post-crisis periods. After estimating the main relationships, the paper ends with a discussion on the ability of potential redistributive policies to reverse this pattern of inequality.     

A decomposition analysis of income inequality of Chinese rural households

This paper reports an application of household survey data collected from grain producing areas in five provinces of China to issues of the determinants of rural inequality. Previous studies suggest that non-agricultural activities have been the major cause of rural income inequality, which has important implications for policy formulation. However, our results show that inequality within the grain producing areas was also very high, with differences in crop income as the major source of inequality. The policy implications are also different from those of previous studies. While some suggest that an increase in agricultural income can reduce inequality, our results indicate that this is not universally true. In some cases, whether the increase in crop income has come from state procurement also matters. These results call for a more cautious and area-specific approach to policy formulation as far as inequality is concerned.     

Migration from rural areas of poor countries: The impact on rural productivity and income distribution

Evidence is presented elsewhere²⁶ that intra-rural inequality is a major cause of rural-urban migration: that better-off villagers tend to be ‘pulled’, and worse-off villagers ‘pushed’, from the same subset of relatively ‘unequal’ villages. This paper argues that townward emigration, and its after-effects (remittances, return migration), in turn increases interpersonal and inter-household inequality within and between villages. As for rural labour productivity, the neoclassical expectation (that townward migration increases it) rests on special definitions and doubtful assumptions. Fortunately, in most of the poorer developing countries, rural-urban migration is much smaller, less permanent and more likely to set up countervailing economic-demographic pressures restoring the rural population share, than received opinion about ‘the urban crisis’ suggests. Migration does not equilibriate between urban and rural sectors, largely because of externalities and compositional factors; but it does smoothe itself, largely because individuals behave rationally and learn quickly. As so often, the lesson for development studies is not that ‘markets fail’. It is that, under conditions of both poverty and structural inequality, they function — but with generally unacceptable, misery-preserving consequences.     

What can be learned from China’s success?

Since 1978, China has experienced the most rapid economic growth of any country in world history, and the most rapid growth in living standards of any major economy. Following the latest international financial crisis, China outperformed any other major economy – from the second quarter of 2007 to the second quarter of 2014, China’s economy grew by 78% and the USA by 8%. In a single generation, China has gone from a ‘low income economy’ to the verge of achieving ‘high income’ status by World Bank criteria. Achieving this would double the population living in ‘high income’ economies globally. This extremely rapid development is sometimes explained in terms of unique ‘Chinese characteristics’, but research over the last 30 years suggests it is rooted in universal economic processes. While the combination of global forces producing economic growth is unique in China and produces unique ‘Chinese characteristics’, they can operate throughout the world economy. If other developing economies could achieve the scale of China’s economic success, global problems of poverty and its consequences would be solved. China’s policy response to the international financial crisis was far more effective than that of other major economies. This paper examines the chief strategic lessons to be drawn from China’s success.     

The impacts of environmental pollution and brain drain on income inequality

This paper establishes a two-sector general equilibrium model of a small open economy to examine the impact of environmental pollution on income inequality via brain drain. The results of the equilibrium modelling show that environmental pollution in the source country can widen the income gap between skilled and unskilled workers and that brain drain caused by environmental pollution will amplify this effect; furthermore, improving the environmental quality in the recipient country will widen the skilled-unskilled income gap in the source country. Our empirical results show that deteriorating the environmental quality in the source country increases income inequality and that brain drain caused by environmental quality will amplify the effect. Our sample is divided into four sub-samples: stage of national development, level of national income, status of environmental pollution and situation of brain drain. We find that environmental pollution has different effects on income inequality via brain drain in these sub-samples. Comparing the heterogeneous components of environmental quality, we find that brain drain caused by diminished ecosystem vitality and by air quality affecting human health will widen income inequality but that other factors related to environmental quality have no significant impacts on the effect of brain drain on income inequality. The results of a robustness test support these conclusions.