In a great deal of empirical work on distributional analysis, the only sorts of inequality measures employed are ‘relative’ ones. The present paper argues the case for a more plural approach to inequality measurement, in which both ‘absolute’ and ‘intermediate’ conceptualizations of inequality are admitted. In particular, it is suggested that there is a strong case for the employment of intermediate measures of inequality in assessing over time changes in inequality and, through that route, the inclusiveness or otherwise of the process of growth in per capita income. The purpose of the paper is two fold: exposition and persuasion.
AmielY., and CowellF. A.Thinking About Inequality. Distributional Analysis Research Programme: London School of Economics (PWD). 1999. Available at: http://darp.lse.ac.uk/papersdb/amiel_cowell_tai.pdf. (Published 1999: Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.)
2.
AtkinsonA.B.On the measurement of inequality.J Econ Theory.1970; 2(3): 244–63.
3.
AtkinsonA. B., and BrandoliniA.'Global World Inequality: Absolute, Relative or Intermediate?', paper prepared for the 28th General Conference of the International association for Research in Income and Wealth, Cork, Ireland, August 22–28, 2004. Available at: http://www.iariw.org/papers/2004/brand.pdf.
4.
AzpitarteF., and Alsonso-VillarO.'Ray-invariant intermediate inequality measures: a lorenz dominance criterion', ECINEQ Working paper. 2011; 2011–26.
5.
BosmansK., DecancqK., DecosterA.The relativity of decreasing inequality between countries.Economica.2014; 81(322): 276–92.
6.
BossertW., PfingstenA.Intermediate inequality: concepts, indices and welfare implications.Math Soc Sci.1990; 19(2): 117–34.
7.
ChakravartyS.R., TyagarupanandaS.The sugroup decomposable absolute indices of inequality. In: ChakravartyS.R., CoondooD., MukherjeeR., editors. Quantitative economics: theory and practice, essays in honour of professor N. Bhattacharya.New Delhi: Allied Publishers Limited; 1998.
8.
ChakravartyS.R., TyagarupanandaS.The subgroup decomposable intermediate indices of inequality.Span Econ Rev.2009; 11(2): 83–97.
9.
Del RioC., Alonso-VillarO.New unit-consistent intermediate inequality indices.Economic Theory.2010; 42(3): 505–21.
10.
Del RioC., Alonso-VillarO.Rankings of income distributions: a note on intermediate inequality indices.Vigo: Universidade de; 2011. Available at: http://webs.urigo.es/crio/REI.pdf.
11.
Del RioC., Ruiz-CastilloJ.Intermediate inequality and welfare.Soc Choice Welf.2000; 17(2): 223–39.
12.
Del RioC., Ruiz-CastilloJ.intermediate inequality and welfare: the case of Spain.Rev Income Wealth.2001; 47(2): 221–37.
13.
JayarajD., and SubramanianS.On the interpersonal inclusiveness of India's consumption expenditure growth.Econ Polit Wkly.2012; XLVII(45): 56–66.
14.
JayarajD., SubramanianS.On the inter-group inclusiveness of india's consumption expenditure growth.Econ Polit Wkly.2013; 10: 65–70. Jenkins SP, Jäntti M. Methods for summarizing and comparing wealth distributions', ISER Working Paper 2005–05. Colchester: University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research; 2005.
ShorrocksA.F.Aggregation issues in inequality measurement. In: EichhornW., editor. Measurement in economics: theory and applications in economic indices.Heidelberg: Physica Verlag; 1988.
22.
SubramanianS.'Inequality Measurement with Subgroup Decomposability and Level-Sensitivity', Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal. 2011. Vol. 5, 2011–9. doi: 10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2011-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2011-9.
23.
SubramanianS., and JayarajD.'The Evolution of Consumption and Wealth Inequality in India: A Quantitative Assessment', Journal of Globalization and Development. 2013. (Published Online: 11/29/2013)
24.
YoshidaT.Social welfare rankings of income distributions: a new parametric concept of intermediate inequality.Soc Choice Welf.2005; 24(3): 557–74.
