[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
GDP vs. income gap
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------273E4DDB6F8A
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Anh AiViet, anh AnHai,
Anh AiViet vie^'t:
> Anh co' the^? xem trong ca'c nu+o+'c co' GDP tra(ng va` income
> inequality
> ta(ng thi` co' ty? le^. bao nhie^u nu+o+'c la` dda~ gia`u to va` bao
> nhie^u la` ddang nghe`o ma.t re^.p nhu+ ta. Va` ty? le^. gia`u
nghe`o
> trong
> ca'c nu+o+'c co' income inequality gia?m. To^i nghi~ nho'm tru+o+'c
> co'
> nhie^`u anh nghe`o va` nho'm sau co' nhie^`u anh gia`u.
> Co`n tho^'ng ke^ cu?a anh o+? mu+'c na`y tho^i thi` chu+a ddu?
> ke^'t
> lua^.n, co' ddu'ng kho^ng? Am I wrong here?
>
Xin dda(ng la.i ca'i survey dde^? ca'c anh tham kha?o. To^i nghi~
la` argument dde^? no'i growth kho^ng a?nh hu+o+?ng la('m dde^'n
income inequality kho^ng na(`m o+? ca'i ty? le^. 50-50, ma` la`
o+? cho^~ income inequality chi? "ho+i" (slightly) ta(ng hoa(.c ho+i
gia?m ma` tho^i. Tie^'c la` to^i cu~ng kho^ng ro~ data chi'nh xa'c
cu?a ho. ra sao dde^? bie^'t "ho+i" la` bao nhie^u. Tre^n website
cu?a WB to^i kho^ng ti`m ddu+o+.c dda^`y ddu? ca'c tho^ng tin
ve^` ta'c gia?, tho+`i gian cu~ng nhu+ reference cu?a ba`i na`y,
chi? co' contact info tho^i. To^i nghi~ o^ng Lyn Squire cu~ng
la` mo^.t trong ca'c ta'c gia? ba`i na`y, va` ca? ba`i AnHai
post le^n nu+~a.
Theo nhu+ to^i hie^?u thi` conclusion la` growth kho^ng tru+.c tie^'p
da^~n dde^'n income inequality, nhu+ng income (hoa(.c assets)
inequality
thi` co' a?nh hu+o+?ng dde^'n growth. Income/assets inequality tha^'p
thi`co' the^? dda.t growth cao. VN co' income inequality index kho^ng
cao
(38.5 / 100), nhu+ng assets thi` to^i kho^ng ro~ chi? so^' la`
bao nhie^u, va` kho^ng bie^'t co' ti'nh ddu+o+.c kho^ng vi` chu? ye^'u
la` cu?a nha` nu+o+'c. Va^.y ta co' co+ ho^.i dde^? pha't trie^?n
nhanh.
Ca'c ba'c co' nghi~ va^.y kho^ng ?
To^i vie^'t:
> > > Ca'i thread na`y dda^m ra la.i hay. To^i la.i vu+`a mo+'i ddo.c
mo^.t
> > > survey cu?a mo^.t o^ng o+? World Bank, ke^'t lua^.n la` GDP
growth
> > > tha^.t ra cha(?ng a?nh hu+o+?ng gi` ma^'y dde^'n income
inequality.
> > > (Trong 88 nu+O+'c co' GDP growth thi` 50% co' income inequality
ho+i
> > > ta(ng va` 50% thi` ho+i gia?m).
http://www.worldbank.org/html/dec/annual/growth.htm
Contact: Lyn Squire, Director, Policy Research Department
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Inequality, Poverty and Growth
> >
> > Research underway in the World Bank using greatly improved
> > data has led to some new and surprising conclusions. Contrary
> > to what many people believe, economic growth does not necessarily
> > increase the gap between the rich and poor. In the 88 instances where
> > a country achieved per capita GDP growth for a decade, inequality
> > improved slightly in about half the cases and worsened slightly in the
> > other half.
> >
> > Because the changes in inequality were quite small, growth almost
> > always improved the incomes of the poor. Although growth does not
> > consistently affect inequality one way or the other, the level of
> > inequality does affect growth. In general, developing countries with a
> > more equal distribution of assets -- specifically land -- grew more
> > rapidly than countries with a less equal distribution of assets. This
> > presents a serious problem for those countries -- many in Latin
> > America -- where asset distribution is very unequal, since very few
> > countries have achieved significant reductions in inequality.
> >
> > Following are key facts emerging from the research as well as
> > background information related to the issues of inequality, poverty
> > and growth. (The Gini index measures inequality on a 100 point scale
> > where 1 represents perfect equality and 100 represents absolute
> > inequality, that is, all wealth held by just one household.)
> >
> > Inequality differs significantly across countries.
>
> > * Gini measures range from high inequality in countries
> > such as Brazil (57) and South Africa (62) to low inequality in
> > countries such as Belgium (27) and India (33).
> >
> > Shifts in inequality tend to be small.
> >
> > * In India the Gini index shifted from 36 in 1951 to 32 in 1992; in
> > Japan, the index moved from 37 in 1964 to 35 in 1990.
> > * Among 49 countries with data on inequality over a long period,
> > only four showed a substantial trend in either direction.
> > Inequality declined in France and Italy and increased in China
> > and New Zealand. (A substantial trend is defined as an average
> > annual change in the country's Gini index of more than 1% over
> > the period covered by the data.)
> > * In the past two decades, inequality has increased in the U.S. and
> > the U.K. Between 1977 and 1991, the Gini index for the U.S. moved
> > from 34.9 to 37.9; in the U.K. the index moved from 22.9 to 32.4.
> > Of course, inequality in both countries is still much lower than
> > in many developing countries.
> >
> > Growth has no systematic impact on inequality.
> >
> > * Of the 88 instances world wide where a country achieved growth in
> > per capita GDP for a decade, inequality improved slightly in
> > about half the cases and worsened slightly in the other half.
> > * State-level data from India spanning 40 years show that among the
> > states that achieved economic growth, inequality declined in
> > three quarters and increased in the remaining quarter.
> >
> > Growth almost always benefits the poor.
> >
> > * Among the 88 instances of growth for a decade, the incomes of the
> > poorest fifth of the population increased in 77 cases (88%).
> > o Among the 57 countries that grew at least 2% for a decade,
> > incomes of the poorest fifth of the population improved in
> > all but three. In India, poverty declined in all 14 states
> > that achieved growth in mean income.
> >
> > In general, the higher the rate of growth, the more rapid the
> > reduction in poverty.
> >
> > * In Indonesia, where GDP grew at an average annual rate of 3.7%
> > from 1970 to 1990, real income increased three-fold--from about
> > $700 to $2,000. Over the same period, the percentage of people
> > living in poverty fell from 60% to 15%.
> > * In the U.S., where the economy grew at an average annual rate of
> > about 2% between 1959 and 1991, real income increased from $9,900
> > to $17,500. Over the same period, the percentage of people living
> > below the official poverty line fell from more than 18% to less
> > than 12%.
> > * In Cote d'Ivoire, where GDP declined by an average 2.7% between
> > 1985 and 1990, the proportion of the population in poverty
> > increased from 14% to 20%.
> > 1. Among developing countries, the more unequal the
> > distribution of assets, the lower future economic growth.
> > + Among countries with a very unequal distribution of
> > assets, only Brazil has managed to grow at more than
> > 2.5 percent a year. Brazil is also one of the very few
> > countries where poverty increased despite growth.
> > * Reducing inequality is very difficult. Only a few countries with
> > high inequality have reduced inequality at all. Among these
> > exceptions are Costa Rica (from 50 in 1961 to 46 in 1989) and
> > Turkey (from 56 in 1968 to 44 in 1987).
> > 1. Inequality, poverty and growth in three developing regions:
> > + East Asia has a relatively equal distribution of land
> > and has achieved unusually high rates of growth -- an
> > average across countries of more than 4% per annum
> > between 1960 and 1990. Between 1985 and 1990, poverty
> > has fallen in all the countries for which data is
> > available except for China.
> > * Latin America has a very unequal distribution of assets; growth
> > has been erratic (1.3% per annum on average). Between 1985 and
> > 1990, poverty has increased in six countries, fallen in four, and
> > remained unchanged in two.
> > * Land distribution patterns vary widely in Sub-Saharan Africa but
> > even countries with relatively equal land distribution that
> > pursued ineffective policies have had very low growth. The region
> > has been characterized by poor policies and very low growth
> > overall (0.3% on average). Available information suggests that
> > poverty has increased.
>
--------------273E4DDB6F8A
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID: <md5:B330DC879F740E30646030DE6E37E0DA>
Received: from gamma.mimuw.edu.pl by alfa.mimuw.edu.pl with SMTP
(1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA21526; Thu, 15 May 1997 19:17:19 +0200
Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 19:24:21 +0200
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl>
Return-Path: <MAILER-DAEMON@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl>
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
To: <nttrung@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl>
----- Transcript of session follows -----
While connected to miller.cs.uwm.edu [129.89.35.22] (tcp):
>>> RCPT To:<vnsa-l@cs.uwm.edu>
<<< 550 <vnsa-l@cs.uwm.edu>... User unknown
550 <vnsa-l@cs.uwm.edu>... User unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: from gamma.mimuw.edu.pl by alfa.mimuw.edu.pl with SMTP
(1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA21525; Thu, 15 May 1997 19:17:19 +0200
Return-Path: <nttrung@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl>
Sender: nttrung@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl
Message-Id: <337B46C5.68AA@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl>
Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 19:24:21 +0200
From: Nguyen Tuan Trung <nttrung@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; HP-UX A.09.05 9000/715)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: vnsa-l@cs.uwm.edu
Subject: [Fwd: Re: GDP vs. income gap]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------6C3728A6E79"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------6C3728A6E79
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Anh AiViet, anh AnHai,
Anh AiViet vie^'t:
> Anh co' the^? xem trong ca'c nu+o+'c co' GDP tra(ng va` income
inequality
> ta(ng thi` co' ty? le^. bao nhie^u nu+o+'c la` dda~ gia`u to va` bao
> nhie^u la` ddang nghe`o ma.t re^.p nhu+ ta. Va` ty? le^. gia`u nghe`o
trong
> ca'c nu+o+'c co' income inequality gia?m. To^i nghi~ nho'm tru+o+'c
co'
> nhie^`u anh nghe`o va` nho'm sau co' nhie^`u anh gia`u.
> Co`n tho^'ng ke^ cu?a anh o+? mu+'c na`y tho^i thi` chu+a ddu?
ke^'t
> lua^.n, co' ddu'ng kho^ng? Am I wrong here?
Xin dda(ng la.i ca'i survey dde^? ca'c anh tham kha?o. To^i nghi~
la` argument dde^? no'i growth kho^ng a?nh hu+o+?ng la('m dde^'n
income inequality kho^ng na(`m o+? ca'i ty? le^. 50-50, ma` la`
o+? cho^~ income inequality chi? "ho+i" (slightly) ta(ng hoa(.c ho+i
gia?m ma` tho^i. Tie^'c la` to^i cu~ng kho^ng ro~ data chi'nh xa'c
cu?a ho. ra sao dde^? bie^'t "ho+i" la` bao nhie^u. Tre^n website
cu?a WB to^i kho^ng ti`m ddu+o+.c dda^`y ddu? ca'c tho^ng tin
ve^` ta'c gia?, tho+`i gian cu~ng nhu+ reference cu?a ba`i na`y,
chi? co' contact info tho^i. To^i nghi~ o^ng Lyn Squire cu~ng
la` mo^.t trong ca'c ta'c gia? ba`i na`y, va` ca? ba`i AnHai
post le^n nu+~a.
Theo nhu+ to^i hie^?u thi` conclusion la` growth kho^ng tru+.c tie^'p
da^~n dde^'n income inequality, nhu+ng income (hoa(.c assets) inequality
thi` co' a?nh hu+o+?ng dde^'n growth. Income/assets inequality tha^'p
thi`
co' the^? dda.t growth cao. VN co' income inequality index kho^ng cao
(38.5 / 100), nhu+ng assets thi` to^i kho^ng ro~ chi? so^' la`
bao nhie^u, va` kho^ng bie^'t co' ti'nh ddu+o+.c kho^ng vi` chu? ye^'u
la` cu?a nha` nu+o+'c. Va^.y ta co' co+ ho^.i dde^? pha't trie^?n
nhanh.
Ca'c ba'c co' nghi~ va^.y kho^ng ?
To^i vie^'t:
> > > Ca'i thread na`y dda^m ra la.i hay. To^i la.i vu+`a mo+'i ddo.c mo^.t
> > > survey cu?a mo^.t o^ng o+? World Bank, ke^'t lua^.n la` GDP growth
> > > tha^.t ra cha(?ng a?nh hu+o+?ng gi` ma^'y dde^'n income inequality.
> > > (Trong 88 nu+O+'c co' GDP growth thi` 50% co' income inequality ho+i
> > > ta(ng va` 50% thi` ho+i gia?m).
http://www.worldbank.org/html/dec/annual/growth.htm
Contact: Lyn Squire, Director, Policy Research Department
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Inequality, Poverty and Growth
>
> Research underway in the World Bank using greatly improved
> data has led to some new and surprising conclusions. Contrary
> to what many people believe, economic growth does not necessarily
> increase the gap between the rich and poor. In the 88 instances where
> a country achieved per capita GDP growth for a decade, inequality
> improved slightly in about half the cases and worsened slightly in the
> other half.
>
> Because the changes in inequality were quite small, growth almost
> always improved the incomes of the poor. Although growth does not
> consistently affect inequality one way or the other, the level of
> inequality does affect growth. In general, developing countries with a
> more equal distribution of assets -- specifically land -- grew more
> rapidly than countries with a less equal distribution of assets. This
> presents a serious problem for those countries -- many in Latin
> America -- where asset distribution is very unequal, since very few
> countries have achieved significant reductions in inequality.
>
> Following are key facts emerging from the research as well as
> background information related to the issues of inequality, poverty
> and growth. (The Gini index measures inequality on a 100 point scale
> where 1 represents perfect equality and 100 represents absolute
> inequality, that is, all wealth held by just one household.)
>
> Inequality differs significantly across countries.
> * Gini measures range from high inequality in countries
> such as Brazil (57) and South Africa (62) to low inequality in
> countries such as Belgium (27) and India (33).
>
> Shifts in inequality tend to be small.
>
> * In India the Gini index shifted from 36 in 1951 to 32 in 1992; in
> Japan, the index moved from 37 in 1964 to 35 in 1990.
> * Among 49 countries with data on inequality over a long period,
> only four showed a substantial trend in either direction.
> Inequality declined in France and Italy and increased in China
> and New Zealand. (A substantial trend is defined as an average
> annual change in the country's Gini index of more than 1% over
> the period covered by the data.)
> * In the past two decades, inequality has increased in the U.S. and
> the U.K. Between 1977 and 1991, the Gini index for the U.S. moved
> from 34.9 to 37.9; in the U.K. the index moved from 22.9 to 32.4.
> Of course, inequality in both countries is still much lower than
> in many developing countries.
>
> Growth has no systematic impact on inequality.
>
> * Of the 88 instances world wide where a country achieved growth in
> per capita GDP for a decade, inequality improved slightly in
> about half the cases and worsened slightly in the other half.
> * State-level data from India spanning 40 years show that among the
> states that achieved economic growth, inequality declined in
> three quarters and increased in the remaining quarter.
>
> Growth almost always benefits the poor.
>
> * Among the 88 instances of growth for a decade, the incomes of the
> poorest fifth of the population increased in 77 cases (88%).
> o Among the 57 countries that grew at least 2% for a decade,
> incomes of the poorest fifth of the population improved in
> all but three. In India, poverty declined in all 14 states
> that achieved growth in mean income.
>
> In general, the higher the rate of growth, the more rapid the
> reduction in poverty.
>
> * In Indonesia, where GDP grew at an average annual rate of 3.7%
> from 1970 to 1990, real income increased three-fold--from about
> $700 to $2,000. Over the same period, the percentage of people
> living in poverty fell from 60% to 15%.
> * In the U.S., where the economy grew at an average annual rate of
> about 2% between 1959 and 1991, real income increased from $9,900
> to $17,500. Over the same period, the percentage of people living
> below the official poverty line fell from more than 18% to less
> than 12%.
> * In Cote d'Ivoire, where GDP declined by an average 2.7% between
> 1985 and 1990, the proportion of the population in poverty
> increased from 14% to 20%.
> 1. Among developing countries, the more unequal the
> distribution of assets, the lower future economic growth.
> + Among countries with a very unequal distribution of
> assets, only Brazil has managed to grow at more than
> 2.5 percent a year. Brazil is also one of the very few
> countries where poverty increased despite growth.
> * Reducing inequality is very difficult. Only a few countries with
> high inequality have reduced inequality at all. Among these
> exceptions are Costa Rica (from 50 in 1961 to 46 in 1989) and
> Turkey (from 56 in 1968 to 44 in 1987).
> 1. Inequality, poverty and growth in three developing regions:
> + East Asia has a relatively equal distribution of land
> and has achieved unusually high rates of growth -- an
> average across countries of more than 4% per annum
> between 1960 and 1990. Between 1985 and 1990, poverty
> has fallen in all the countries for which data is
> available except for China.
> * Latin America has a very unequal distribution of assets; growth
> has been erratic (1.3% per annum on average). Between 1985 and
> 1990, poverty has increased in six countries, fallen in four, and
> remained unchanged in two.
> * Land distribution patterns vary widely in Sub-Saharan Africa but
> even countries with relatively equal land distribution that
> pursued ineffective policies have had very low growth. The region
> has been characterized by poor policies and very low growth
> overall (0.3% on average). Available information suggests that
> poverty has increased.
--------------6C3728A6E79
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Received: from alfa.mimuw.edu.pl (alfa.mimuw.edu.pl [148.81.13.7]) by ghost.mimuw.edu.pl (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA22466 for <nttrung@mimuw.edu.pl>; Thu, 15 May 1997 17:50:50 +0200
Received: from sinus.mimuw.edu.pl by alfa.mimuw.edu.pl with SMTP
(1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA20770; Thu, 15 May 1997 17:46:57 +0200
Message-Id: <337B2B82.D0AA5A3F@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl>
Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 17:28:02 +0200
From: Tuan Trung NGUYEN <nttrung@alfa.mimuw.edu.pl>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0b4 [en] (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: nttrung@mimuw.edu.pl
Subject: Re: GDP vs. income gap
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970514163208.7937A-100000@lynx.cat.syr.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------36D3E69DBE1A158C1D19182F"
X-Status:
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------36D3E69DBE1A158C1D19182F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Anh AiViet, anh AnHai,
> Anh co' the^? xem trong ca'c nu+o+'c co' GDP tra(ng va` income inequality
> ta(ng thi` co' ty? le^. bao nhie^u nu+o+'c la` dda~ gia`u to va` bao
> nhie^u la` ddang nghe`o ma.t re^.p nhu+ ta. Va` ty? le^. gia`u nghe`o trong
> ca'c nu+o+'c co' income inequality gia?m. To^i nghi~ nho'm tru+o+'c co'
> nhie^`u anh nghe`o va` nho'm sau co' nhie^`u anh gia`u.
> Co`n tho^'ng ke^ cu?a anh o+? mu+'c na`y tho^i thi` chu+a ddu? ke^'t
> lua^.n, co' ddu'ng kho^ng? Am I wrong here?
Xin dda(ng la.i ca'i survey dde^? ca'c anh nghie^n cu+'u. To^i nghi~
la` argument dde^? no'i growth kho^ng a?nh hu+o+?ng la('m dde^'n
income inequality kho^ng na(`m o+? ca'i ty? le^. 50-50, ma` la`
o+? cho^~ income inequality chi? "ho+i" (slightly) ta(ng hoa(.c ho+i
gia?m
ma` tho^i. To^i cu~ng kho^ng ro~ data chi'nh xa'c cu?a ho. ra sao
dde^? bie^'t "ho+i" la` bao nhie^u.
> > Ca'i thread na`y dda^m ra la.i hay. To^i la.i vu+`a mo+'i ddo.c mo^.t
> > survey cu?a mo^.t o^ng o+? World Bank, ke^'t lua^.n la` GDP growth
> > tha^.t ra cha(?ng a?nh hu+o+?ng gi` ma^'y dde^'n income inequality.
> > (Trong 88 nu+O+'c co' GDP growth thi` 50% co' income inequality ho+i
> > ta(ng
> > va` 50% thi` ho+i gia?m). Nghi~a la` co' khi la.i cha(?ng pha?i lu+.a
> > cho.n A,B, vs hay ty? le^. va`ng ba.c gi` ra'o. Cu+' ma(.c cho no'
> > pha't trie^?n. Xem ra sa(.c mu`i laissez-faire-ism. Ca'c ba'c nghi~ sao
Aiviet Nguyen wrote:
>
> Hi Anh Trung,
> Anh co' the^? xem trong ca'c nu+o+'c co' GDP tra(ng va` income inequality
> ta(ng thi` co' ty? le^. bao nhie^u nu+o+'c la` dda~ gia`u to va` bao
> nhie^u la` ddang nghe`o ma.t re^.p nhu+ ta. Va` ty? le^. gia`u nghe`o trong
> ca'c nu+o+'c co' income inequality gia?m. To^i nghi~ nho'm tru+o+'c co'
> nhie^`u anh nghe`o va` nho'm sau co' nhie^`u anh gia`u.
> Co`n tho^'ng ke^ cu?a anh o+? mu+'c na`y tho^i thi` chu+a ddu? ke^'t
> lua^.n, co' ddu'ng kho^ng? Am I wrong here?
> Cheers
> Aiviet
>
> On Wed, 14 May 1997, Tuan Trung NGUYEN wrote:
>
> > Ca'c ba'c,
> >
> > Ca'i thread na`y dda^m ra la.i hay. To^i la.i vu+`a mo+'i ddo.c mo^.t
> > survey cu?a mo^.t o^ng o+? World Bank, ke^'t lua^.n la` GDP growth
> > tha^.t ra cha(?ng a?nh hu+o+?ng gi` ma^'y dde^'n income inequality.
> > (Trong 88 nu+O+'c co' GDP growth thi` 50% co' income inequality ho+i
> > ta(ng
> > va` 50% thi` ho+i gia?m). Nghi~a la` co' khi la.i cha(?ng pha?i lu+.a
> > cho.n A,B, vs hay ty? le^. va`ng ba.c gi` ra'o. Cu+' ma(.c cho no'
> > pha't trie^?n. Xem ra sa(.c mu`i laissez-faire-ism. Ca'c ba'c nghi~ sao
> > ?
> >
> >
> > Ba'c La^m vie^'t:
> > > Tui dda? pha' lo^'i tu+ duy "Hamlet" A vs. B cu?a nhie^`u vi. trong vu.
> > > na`y. Va^'n dde^` k0 pha?i la` "ca? xh cu`ng tie^'n (hoa(.c lu`i, hoa(.c
> > > da^.m cha^n ta.i cho^~)" vs. "cha(m cho dda^`u ta`u ma.nh dda(.ng ke'o
> > > ddoa`n ta`u theo", ma` va^'n dde^` o+? cho^~ dda^u la` ty? le^. "va`ng"
> > > giu+~a hai components.
> >
--------------36D3E69DBE1A158C1D19182F
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="growth1.htm"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="growth1.htm"
Content-Base: "file:///C|/USERS/TRUNG/Tmp/growth1.htm"
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Inequality, Poverty and
Growth</TITLE></HEAD><BODY>
<CENTER><H1>Inequality, Poverty and Growth</H1>
</CENTER><P> <BR> </P>
<P><IMG SRC="/html/dec/annual/gifs/growth1.gif" ALIGN="right" BORDER="0">
Research underway in the World Bank using greatly
improved data has led to some new and surprising conclusions.
Contrary to what many people believe, economic growth does
not necessarily increase the gap between the rich and poor.
In the 88 instances where a country achieved per capita GDP
growth for a decade, inequality improved slightly in about
half the cases and worsened slightly in the other half.</P>
<P>
Because the changes in inequality were quite small,
growth almost always improved the incomes of the poor.
<I>Although growth does not consistently affect inequality
one way or the other, the level of inequality does affect
growth.</I> In general, developing countries with a more
equal distribution of assets -- specifically land -- grew
more rapidly than countries with a less equal distribution of
assets. This presents a serious problem for those countries
-- many in Latin America -- where asset distribution is very
unequal, since very few countries have achieved significant
reductions in inequality.</P>
<P>Following are key facts emerging from the research as
well as background information related to the issues of
inequality, poverty and growth. (The Gini index measures
inequality on a 100 point scale where 1 represents perfect
equality and 100 represents absolute inequality, that is, all
wealth held by just one household.)</P>
<H3><B>Inequality differs significantly across
countries.
<IMG SRC="/html/dec/annual/gifs/growth2.gif" ALIGN="right" BORDER="0">
</B></H3>
<UL><LI>Gini measures range from high inequality in
countries such as Brazil (57) and South Africa (62) to low
inequality in countries such as Belgium (27) and India
(33).</LI>
</UL>
<H3><B>Shifts in inequality tend to be small.</B></H3>
<UL><LI>In India the Gini index shifted from 36 in 1951 to
32 in 1992; in Japan, the index moved from 37 in 1964 to 35
in 1990.</LI>
<LI>Among 49 countries with data on inequality over a long
period, only four showed a substantial trend in either
direction. Inequality declined in France and Italy and
increased in China and New Zealand. (A substantial trend is
defined as an average annual change in the country's Gini
index of more than 1% over the period covered by the
data.)</LI>
<LI>In the past two decades, inequality has increased in the
U.S. and the U.K. Between 1977 and 1991, the Gini index for
the U.S. moved from 34.9 to 37.9; in the U.K. the index moved
from 22.9 to 32.4. Of course, inequality in both countries is
still much lower than in many developing countries.</LI>
</UL>
<H3><B>Growth has no systematic impact on
inequality.</B></H3>
<UL><LI>Of the 88 instances world wide where a country
achieved growth in per capita GDP for a decade, inequality
improved slightly in about half the cases and worsened
slightly in the other half.</LI>
<LI>State-level data from India spanning 40 years show that
among the states that achieved economic growth, inequality
declined in three quarters and increased in the remaining
quarter.</LI>
</UL>
<H3> <BR> </H3>
<H3><B>Growth almost always benefits the poor.</B></H3>
<UL><LI>Among the 88 instances of growth for a decade, the
incomes of the poorest fifth of the population increased in
77 cases (88%).
<UL><LI>Among the 57 countries that grew at least 2% for a
decade, incomes of the poorest fifth of the population
improved in all but three. In India, poverty declined in all
14 states that achieved growth in mean income.</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
</UL>
<H3><B>In general, the higher the rate of growth, the more
rapid the reduction in poverty.</B></H3>
<UL><LI>
In Indonesia, where GDP grew at an average annual
rate of 3.7% from 1970 to 1990, real income increased
three-fold--from about $700 to $2,000. Over the same period,
the percentage of people living in poverty fell from 60% to
15%.</LI>
<LI>In the U.S., where the economy grew at an average annual
rate of about 2% between 1959 and 1991, real income increased
from $9,900 to $17,500. Over the same period, the percentage
of people living below the official poverty line fell from
more than 18% to less than 12%.</LI>
<LI>In Cote d'Ivoire, where GDP declined by an average 2.7%
between 1985 and 1990, the proportion of the population in
poverty increased from 14% to 20%.
<OL>
<LI><I>Among developing countries, the more unequal the
distribution of assets, the lower future economic growth.</I>
<UL><LI>Among countries with a very unequal distribution of
assets, only Brazil has managed to grow at more than 2.5
percent a year. Brazil is also one of the very few countries
where poverty increased despite growth.</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
</OL>
</LI><LI>Reducing inequality is very difficult. Only a few
countries with high inequality have reduced inequality at
all. Among these exceptions are Costa Rica (from 50 in 1961
to 46 in 1989) and Turkey (from 56 in 1968 to 44 in 1987).
<OL>
<LI><I>Inequality, poverty and growth in three developing
regions:</I>
<UL><LI><I>East Asia</I> has a relatively equal distribution
of land and has achieved unusually high rates of growth -- an
average across countries of more than 4% per annum between
1960 and 1990. Between 1985 and 1990, poverty has fallen in
all the countries for which data is available except for
China.</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
</OL>
</LI><LI><I>Latin America</I> has a very unequal
distribution of assets; growth has been erratic (1.3% per
annum on average). Between 1985 and 1990, poverty has
increased in six countries, fallen in four, and remained
unchanged in two.</LI>
<LI>Land distribution patterns vary widely in <I>Sub-Saharan
Africa</I> but even countries with relatively equal land
distribution that pursued ineffective policies have had very
low growth. The region has been characterized by poor
policies and very low growth overall (0.3% on average).
Available information suggests that poverty has
increased.</LI>
</UL>
<P> <BR> </P>
</BODY></HTML>
--------------36D3E69DBE1A158C1D19182F--
--------------6C3728A6E79--
--------------273E4DDB6F8A--