Abstract
We provide a characterization of the generalised satisfaction—in our terminology non-deprivation—quasi-ordering introduced by S.R. Chakravarty (Keio Econ Stud 34:17–32, (1997)) for making welfare comparisons. The non-deprivation quasi-ordering obeys a weaker version of the principle of transfers: welfare improves only for specific combinations of progressive transfers, which impose that the same amount be taken from richer individuals and allocated to one arbitrary poorer individual. We identify the extended Gini social welfare functions that are consistent with this principle and we show that the unanimity of value judgements among this class is identical to the ranking of distributions implied by the non-deprivation quasi-ordering. We extend the approach to the measurement of inequality by considering the corresponding relative and absolute ethical inequality indices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amiel Y, Cowell F (1992) Measurement of income inequality: experimental test by questionnaire. J Publ Econ 47: 3–26
Amiel Y, Cowell F (1999) Thinking about inequality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Ballano C, Ruiz-Castillo J (1993) Searching by questionnaire for the meaning of income inequality. Revista Espanola Econ 10: 233–259
Berrebi Z, Silber J (1985) Income inequality indices and deprivation: a generalization [relative deprivation and the Gini coefficient]. Quart J Econ 100: 807–810
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (1999) Income inequality measurement: the normative approach. In: Silber J (eds) Handbook of income inequality measurement. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 133–157
Chakravarty S (1997) Relative deprivation and satisfaction orderings. Keio Econ Stud XXXIV: 17–32
Chakravarty S, Mukherjee D (1999) Measures of deprivation and their meaning in terms of social satisfaction. Theory Decis 47: 89–100
Chakravarty S, Chattopadhyay N, Majumder A (1995) Income inequality and relative deprivation. Keio Econ Stud XXXII: 1–15
Chateauneuf A, Moyes P (2004) Lorenz non-consistent welfare and inequality measurement. J Econ Inequality 2: 61–87
Chateauneuf A, Moyes P (2006) Measuring inequality without the Pigou-Dalton condition. In: McGillivray M (eds) Inequality, poverty and well-being. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingtoke, Hampshire/New-York, pp 22–65
Chateauneuf A, Wilthien P-H (1999) Third inverse stochastic dominance, Lorenz curves and favourable double-transfers. CERMSEM Discussion Paper, Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne
Ebert U (1988) Measurement of inequality: an attempt at unification and generalization. Soc Choice Welf 5: 59–81
Ebert U, Moyes P (2000) An axiomatic characterization of the Yitzhaki’s index of individual deprivation. Econ Lett 68: 263–270
Foster J (1985) Inequality measurement. In: Young H (eds) Fair allocation. American Mathematical Society, Providence, pp 38–61
Foster J, Shorrocks A (1988) Poverty orderings and welfare dominance. Soc Choice Welf 5: 91–110
Gaertner W, Namezie C (2003) Income inequality, risk, and the transfer principle: a questionnaire-experimental investigation. Math Soc Sci 45: 229–245
Gastwirth J (1971) A general definition of the Lorenz curve. Econometrica 39: 1037–1039
Harrison E, Seidl C (1994) Perceptional inequality and preference judgements: an empirical examination of distributional axioms. Public Choice 79: 61–68
Hey J, Lambert P (1980) Relative deprivation and the Gini coefficient: comment. Quart J Econ 95: 567–573
Kakwani N (1980) On a class of poverty measures. Econometrica 48: 437–446
Kakwani N (1984) The relative deprivation curve and its applications. J Bus Econ Stat 2: 384–405
Kolm S-C (1969) The optimal production of social justice. In: Margolis J, Guitton H (eds) Public economics. Macmillan, London, pp 145–200
Kolm S-C (1976) Unequal inequalities I. J Econ Theory 12: 416–442
Magdalou B (2006) Une Contribution Théorique et Expérimentale à la La Mesure des Inégalités: Gini et Lorenz au Regard de la Théorie de l’Absence de Privation. PhD Thesis, LAMETA, CNRS-Université Montpellier I, Montpellier, France
Magdalou B, Moyes P (2008) Deprivation and the measurement of welfare and inequality. GREThA Working Paper, CNRS-Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV
Marshall A, Olkin I (1979) Inequalities: theory of majorization and its applications. Academic Press, New-York
Moyes P (1987) A new concept of Lorenz domination. Econ Lett 23: 203–207
Moyes P (1999) Stochastic dominance and the Lorenz curve. In: Silber J (eds) Handbook of income inequality measurement. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 199–222
Quiggin J (1993) Generalized expected utility theory. The rank-dependent model. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Runciman W (1966) Relative deprivation and social justice. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London
Sen A (1973) On economic inequality. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Shorrocks A (1983) Ranking income distributions. Economica 50: 3–17
Weiss Y, Fershtman C (1998) Social status and economic performance: a survey. Euro Econ Rev 42: 801–820
Weymark J (1981) Generalized Gini inequality indices. Math Soc Sci 1: 409–430
Yaari M (1987) The dual theory of choice under risk. Econometrica 55: 99–115
Yaari M (1988) A controversial proposal concerning inequality measurement. J Econ Theory 44: 381–397
Yitzhaki S (1979) Relative deprivation and the Gini coefficient. Quart J Econ 93: 321–324
Zoli C (2002) Inverse stochastic dominance, inequality measurement and Gini indices. In: Moyes P, Seidl C, Shorrocks A (eds) Inequalities: theory, experiments and applications. J Econ Suppl 9:119–161
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This is a shortened version of Magdalou and Moyes (2008), which contains the details of the proofs as well as an empirical illustration.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Magdalou, B., Moyes, P. Deprivation, welfare and inequality. Soc Choice Welf 32, 253–273 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-008-0322-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-008-0322-z