The Unassuming Economist

A recent article in the Financial Times by Martin Sandbu discusses in detail the state of inequality prevalent in the world today. Taking a cue from the World Inequality Report released by the World Inequality Lab on December 7th, 2021, the author makes an important point about the premature fiscal austerity of rich countries exacerbating inequalities after a pandemic (Furceri, Loungani, Ostry, Pizzuto, 2021).

Some other trends highlighted in the article include:

“First, global inequality (between countries) was pretty constant in 2020 compared to the year before — but that stalled a trend of falling inequality since the early 2000s.

Second, global inequality of individual wealth took a jump last year, when the share of global wealth owned by the world’s billionaires increased by half (from 2.2 to 3.3 percent) and that of the top 0.01 percent wealthiest individuals increased by about a percentage point (from 10.3 to 11.1 percent). At the same time, the wealth of the broader top 1 percent group remained stable, both in the US and Europe, so the winners of greater wealth inequality were extremely concentrated at the very top.

Third, Europe is the most egalitarian continent, whether measured by income inequality, wealth inequality, or inequality of individual carbon emissions, the WID’s data on which are fascinating and important. (They show that middle-income people in rich countries emit less than the top 10 percent in some poorer regions.)”

It then goes on to discuss some reasons which explain why Europe is more egalitarian than the US, the role of taxation and public spending for measures to promote equality, etc.

Click here to read the full article.

On December 7th, 2021, the World Inequality Lab released the World Inequality Report 2022, authored by the Lab’s co-director and economist Lucas Chancel and economists Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman. Through the course of its 10 chapters, the report covers insights on themes like changing global economic inequality, the rise of multimillionaires, the disproportionate burden of labor income discrimination on women, carbon inequalities, tax justice, and sustainability. Some notable statistics from the report yield the following results:

1. Income inequality: Globally, the richest 10% of the population currently earns 52% of the global income, whereas the poorest half of the population earns 8% of it. On average, an individual from the top 10% of the global income distribution earns €87,200 (USD122,100) per year, whereas an individual from the poorest half of the global income distribution makes €2,800 (USD3,920) per year.
2. Wealth inequality: The poorest half of the global population barely owns any wealth at all, possessing just 2% of the total. In contrast, the richest 10% of the global population own 76% of all wealth. On average, the poorest half of the population owns PPP €2,900 per adult, i.e. USD4,100 and the top 10% own €550,900 (or USD771,300) on average.
3. Regional variations in inequality: In Europe, the top 10% income share is around 36%, whereas in MENA it reaches 58%. In between these two levels, we see a diversity of patterns. In East Asia, the top 10% makes 43% of total income and in Latin America, 55%. Moreover, while some countries have experienced spectacular increases in inequality (including the US, Russia and India) others like European countries and China have only experienced a little rise.
4. Nations have become richer, but governments have grown poorer: Private wealth has grown immensely but the share of the public sector in total national wealth is close or euqal to 0 in rich countries.
5. Gender inequalities in labor income: Women’s share of total incomes from work (labor income) neared 30% in 1990 and stands at less than 35% today

The report also includes excerpts from Thomas Piketty’s upcoming book titled, ‘A brief history of inequality‘, slated for release in 2022 in the concluding chapter.

Click here to access the full report.

While it has been widely claimed by economists and social scientists that inequality and political polarization are on the rise today, an understanding of people’s perception of ideas of inequality, fairness, and equity has largely evaded critical study. Of late, we have come to realize that perhaps such an understanding could form the missing piece of the puzzle required for effective policymaking. Especially in the USA, researchers have begun to seek answers to questions like why so many voters vote against redistributive policies that would benefit them, such as more progressive income taxes, taxes on capital income or estates, or more generous transfer programs, and why voters have tolerated policies that have contributed to a stark rise in inequality over the past few decades.

A recent column in the The MIT Press Reader (2021) sparks discussion on the same by taking cues from the book ‘Combating Inequality: Rethinking Government’s Role’ by noted economists Oliver Blanchard and Dani Rodrik. The author of the column discusses the role of “intangibles” that cannot be observed even in high-quality administrative datasets but very closely affect the development of policies to combat the problem of high quality. These intangibles- perceptions, views on fairness, and people’s ideas about their own economic standing- are discussed at greater length.

Click here to read the full article.

On similar lines, the OECD’s recent report titled, ‘Does Inequality Matter?‘ (2021), goes a step beyond country-level averages to ultimately find out that people’s perceptions of and levels of concerns about inequality have become very widely dispersed.

“Such dispersion can only be partially explained by standard socio-economic divides across income, education, employment status, gender, age, and household size. In some instances, the dispersion of perceptions and concern becomes polarization between groups with starkly different views. Both dispersion and polarization of perceived disparities and concern have grown steeply over time. Higher levels of observed inequality are associated not only with greater perceived disparities and concerns, but with a more divided public opinion.”

The report also brings out some very intricate insights such as the fact that quite contrary to intuition, most of this increased dispersion in the perception of inequalities and concern for income disparities comes from people who are not less similar but very similar to each in socio-economic characteristics.

Click here to read Section 4 (Has the public opinion become more divided?) of the 2021 OECD Report: Does Inequality Matter?

“The COVID-19 is the fourth crisis to have hit the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region in the decade following the Arab uprisings, the 2014-16 oil price declines, and the 2019 resurgence of protests.  It differs from the other crises because of its broad impacts and its distributional consequences. But even before COVID-19 arrived in March 2020, MENA had been facing a number of serious economic challenges — high rates of unemployment, high levels of informality, low annual economic growth, low female labor force participation, an unconducive business environment, a lack of quality jobs, food insecurity, and fragility and conflict (with large numbers of refugees).”

A recent report by the World Bank Group titled, Distributional Impacts of COVID-19 in the Middle East and North Africa Region (2021), attempts to find answers to pertinent questions regarding this, such as what are the welfare of individuals and households in MENA, and what are the key issues that policymakers should focus on to enable a quick and sustained economic convalescence? 

“The report’s findings suggest a substantial rise in poverty, greater inequality, the emergence of a group of “new poor” (those who were not poor in the first quarter of 2020 but have become poor since), and changes in the labor market (notably how hard people work and how many people work). Top policy options center on stepping up vaccination programs, resuscitating economic activity, rethinking the approach to the informal sector, boosting resilience to future shocks, and improving data quality and transparency.” 

Click here to read the full report.

Excerpts from Professor Dani Rodrik’s working paper, A Primer on Trade and Inequality (2021), for the National Bureau of Economic Research:

“In the public imagination globalization’s adverse effects have loomed large, contributing significantly to the backlash against the political mainstream and the rise of far-right populism. The literature on trade and inequality is in fact exceptionally rich, with important theoretical insights as well as extensive empirical findings that sheds light on this recent experience. Some of the key results of this literature, discussed here, are as follows: Redistribution is the flip side of the gains from trade, and it becomes larger relative to net gains from trade in the advanced stages of globalization. Compensation is difficult for both economic and political reasons. International trade often differs from other market exchanges, raising fairness concerns in ways that domestic markets do not. The economic benefits of deep integration are generally ambiguous. Dynamic or growth gains from trade are uncertain.”

Moreover, on the role of financial globalization and capital mobility the paper takes the following stand. “Researchers at the IMF have found that greater capital mobility produces strong inequality effects (Jaumotte et al., 2013; Furceri and Loungani, 2015; Furceri et al., 2017). In particular, they find that capital-account liberalization leads to statistically significant and long-lasting declines in the labor share of income and corresponding increases in the Gini coefficient of income inequality and in the shares of top 1, 5, and 10 percent of income.”

Click here to read the full paper.