The Kuznets Curve and the Great U-Turn: Income Inequality in U.S. Counties, 1970 to 1990

Nielsen, François; Alderson, Arthur S.

doi:10.2307/2657450

Cited by 235 publications

(206 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

195

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At least as long as the sign is concerned for MQ, EGWS, and M sectors or if the result from the REM for M sector is used, the result is in line with (Albrecht & Albrecht, 2007), although they found significant negative sign for manufacturing because they use the share in total employment of manufacturing. Further this result is more consistent with the early stage of the inverted U pattern of Kuznets (1955) and his later supporters (Lindert, 2000;Nielsen & Alderson, 1997 ) than the latter stage of N pattern. The industrialization process indicated by increased share of the industry sector in GDP is associated with increased income inequality.…”

Section: Economic Structure and Income Inequalitysupporting

confidence: 78%

“…There-fore, one of possible ways to reduce the level of income inequality is not by reducing its share in GRDP but by increasing its share in total employment by absorbing more people across provinces and overtime. If this sector is taken as a subsector in the industry sector the result supports Kuznets (1955) and his later supporters (Lindert, 2000;Nielsen & Alderson, 1997 ). But if it is categorized as a subsector of service sector the result is more consistent with the N pattern (Alderson & Nielsen, 2002).…”

Section: Economic Structure and Income Inequalitysupporting

confidence: 65%

“…Thus the stages of increasing and stabilizing inequality lasted more than 100 years before it finally declined. Results from subsequent studies largely supported Kuznets pattern for the United States and other advanced economies (Lindert, 2000;Nielsen & Alderson, 1997).…”

Section: Possible Explanations For Changing Income Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 56%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Determinant of income inequality in Indonesia

Afandi

Rantung

Marashdeh

2017

Econ. J. Emerg. Mark.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines whether changing economic structure, social conditions, and financialization are responsible for increased income inequality in Indonesia. By employing panel data of 32 provinces in Indonesia that spans from 2007 to 2013, it finds that structural change affects income inequality, increased share of finance reduces inequality, which is against the financialization hypothesis, and social conditions have expected effects on income inequality. While an increased share of both agriculture and service sectors tends to reduce inequality, an increased share of manufacture sector has no effect on inequality. This study finds that falling poverty increases inequality, implying that policy to reduce poverty might not be neutral for inequality and instead cannot prevent it from increasing. Since the higher the college participation rate the higher income inequality tends to be, it does not automatically imply that in order to reduce inequality we need to reduce the number of people who go to college. It might be the case that the college participation rate has not reached a turning point, below which its increase increases inequality, but beyond which its increases reduces inequality. AbstrakPenelitian ini mengkaji pengaruh perubahan struktur ekonomi, finansialisasi, dan kondisi sosial terhadap ketimpangan pendapatan. Menggunakan data panel dengan cross-section 32 propinsi di Indonesia dan rentang waktu 2007-2013, penelitian ini menemukan bahwa perubahan struktural mempengaruhi ketimpangan, kenaikan sumbangan sektor keuangan dalam PDB cenderung menurunkan ketimpangan, yang berarti bertentangan dengan hipotesis finansialisasi, dan kondisi sosial juga berpengaruh terhadap ketimpangan. Sementara kenaikan sumbangan baik sektor pertanian maupun sektor jasa dalam PDB cenderung mengurangi ketimpangan, kenaikan sumbangan sektor industri terbukti tidak mempengaruhi ketimpangan. Studi ini juga menemukan bahwa turunnya tingkat kemiskinan justru manaikkan ketimangan, sehingga kebijakan untuk menurunkan kemiskinan bisa bersifat tidak netral terhadap ketimpangan, melainkan tidak mampu membiarkan ketimpangan untuk tidak naik. Juga ditemukan bahwa kenaikan angka partisipasi kuliah justru menaikkan ketimpangan, yang mengimplikasikan bahwa angka ini belum mencapai titik belok (turning point).

show abstract

Section: Economic Structure and Income Inequalitysupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Economic Structure and Income Inequalitysupporting

confidence: 65%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Determinant of income inequality in Indonesia

Afandi

Rantung

Marashdeh

2017

Econ. J. Emerg. Mark.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To account for the binning in the Census data, we utilized the Pareto-linear procedure (Aigner and Goldberger 1970;Kakwani and Podder 1976), which Nielsen and Alderson (1997) implemented in the prln04.exe program provided by Francois Nielsen at http://www.unc.edu/*nielsen/data/data.htm. constrained to 1), a is an intercept.…”

Section: Methods: Negative Binomial Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Twist on an Old Approach: A Random-Interaction Approach for Estimating Rates of Inter-Group Interaction

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are numerous instances in which researchers wish to measure the rate of intra-or inter-group interactions (whether positive or negative). When computing such measures as rates there is great uncertainty regarding the appropriate denominator: we analytically illustrate how the choice of the denominator when calculating such rates is not trivial and that some existing strategies create a built-in relationship between the computed rate and the group composition within the entity. Another strand of prior work only focused on the relative occurrence of intra-versus inter-group events, which does not account for the important theoretical possibility that both types of events might increase in certain social contexts. Our approach provides an advance over these earlier strategies as it allows one to take into account the relative frequency of interaction between members of different groups, but then translates this into per capita rates. We also provide an empirical example using data on inter-and intra-group robbery and aggravated assault events for block groups in a section of the city of Los Angeles to illustrate how our procedure works and to illustrate how other approaches can lead to dramatically different conclusions.

show abstract

“…Many studies concern the pattern of income inequality during the process of national economic development (such as Ahluwalia, 1976;Anand and Kanbur, 1993;Nielsen, F. and A. S. Alderson, 1997;Barro, 2000) since Kuznets (1955)'s seminal work showing that the income inequality first increases and then decreases as the economic growth process (i.e. an "inverted U curve" relationship).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Bias, Rural-Urban Income Gap and Agricultural Growth: The Resource-Diverting Effect of Rural-Urban Income Gap in China

Gao

2010

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Kuznets Curve and the Great U-Turn: Income Inequality in U.S. Counties, 1970 to 1990

Cited by 235 publications

References 41 publications

Determinant of income inequality in Indonesia

Determinant of income inequality in Indonesia

A New Twist on an Old Approach: A Random-Interaction Approach for Estimating Rates of Inter-Group Interaction

Urban Bias, Rural-Urban Income Gap and Agricultural Growth: The Resource-Diverting Effect of Rural-Urban Income Gap in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About