Competing Concepts of Inequality in the Globalization Debate
Differing value judgments in measuring inequality underlie the conflicting factual claims about how much poor people have shared in the economic gains from globalization. Opponents in the debate differ in the extent to which they care about relative inequality versus absolute inequality, vertical inequalities versus horizontal inequalities, and whether they are consistently individualistic in assessing the extent of inequality. The value judgments on these issues made by both sides need greater scrutiny if the globalization debate is to move forward. This paper--a product of the Poverty Team, Development Research Group--is part of a larger effort in the group to contribute to the ongoing debate on globalization.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
absolute differences absolute gap absolute inequality anti-globalization argument attached to horizontal between-country component between-country inequality Chen and Ravallion China concepts of inequality country level critics of globalization cross-country debate on globalization distribution distributive justice economic growth Economist example Forum on Globalization gains from globalization gains from growth Gini index given income global inequality globalization debate growth rates growth-promoting policies heterogeneity in impacts horizontal inequalities income per capita inequality between countries inequality is unchanged inequality measure initial incomes issues Kanbur losers March 2004 March mean household income mean income measuring inequality Milanovic 2004 policy reforms Policy Research poor countries population weights population-weighted series position one takes poverty and inequality poverty line practice of weighting pro-globalization side Ravallion and Chen reducing absolute poverty relative inequality Research Working Paper rising inequality Sala-i-Martin series in Figure trade reform underlying value judgment weighting countries equally weighting people equally welfare impacts World Bank