Journal of Economics

, Volume 77, Supplement 1, pp 119–161 | Cite as

Inverse stochastic dominance, inequality measurement and Gini indices

  • Claudio Zoli
Inequality Measurement, Decomposition and Redistribution


We investigate the relationship between the third degree inverse stochastic dominance criterion introduced in Muliere and Scarsini (1989) and inequality dominance when Lorenz curves intersect. We propose a new definition of transfer sensitivity aimed at strengthening the Pigou-Dalton Principle of Transfers. Our definition is dual to that suggested by Shorrocks and Foster (1987). It involves a regressive transfer and a progressive transfer both from the same donor, leaving the Gini index unchanged. We prove that finite sequences of these transfers and/or progressive transfers characterize the third degree inverse stochastic dominance criterion. This criterion allows us to make unanimous inequality judgements even when Lorenz curves intersect. The Gini coefficient becomes relevant in these cases in order to conclusively rank the distributions.


Gini index Inverse stochastic dominance Intersecting Lorenz curves 

JEL Classification

D 63 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aaberge, R. (2000): “Ranking Intersecting Lorenz Curves.” Discussion Paper 271, Statistics Norway Research Department.Google Scholar
  2. Atkinson, A. B. (1970): “On The Measurement Of Inequality”.Journal of Economic Theory 2: 244–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkinson, A. B. (1973):More on the measurement of inequality. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  4. Ben Porath, E. and Gilboa, I. (1994): “Linear Measures, The Gini Index, and The Income-Equality Trade-Off.”Journal of Economic Theory 18: 59–80.Google Scholar
  5. Blackorby, C., and Donaldson, D. (1978): “Measures Of Relative Inequality and Their Meaning In Terms Of Social Welfare.”Journal of Economic Theory 64: 443–467.Google Scholar
  6. Blackorby, C. and Donaldson, D. (1984): “Ethically Significant Ordinal Index Of Relative Inequality.” InAdvances in Econometrics, edited by R. L. Basman, and G. F. Rhodes, volume 3, pages 131–147. London: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bossert, W., and Pfingsten, A. (1990): “Intemediate Inequality: Concepts, Indices and Welfare Implications.”Mathematical Social Sciences 19: 117–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chakravarty, S. R. (1988): “On Quasi Orderings Of Income Profiles.” University of Paderborn,Methods of Operations Research 60, XIII Symposium on Operations Research, 455–473.Google Scholar
  9. Chateauneuf, A., Gajdos, T., and Wilthien, P. H. (1999): “The Principle Of Strong Diminishing Transfer.” Working Paper, forthcoming in Journal of Economic Theorey.Google Scholar
  10. Chateauneuf, A., and Wilthien, P. H. (2000): “Third Inverse Stochastic Dominance, Lorenz Curves and Favourable Double Transfers.” Working Paper CERMSEM.Google Scholar
  11. Dalton, H. (1920): “The Measurement Of The Inequality Of Incomes.”Economic Journal 20: 348–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dardanoni, V., and Lambert, P. J. (1988): “Welfare Rankings Of Income Distributions: A Role For The Variance and Some Insights For Tax Reform.”Social Choice and Welfare 5: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dasgupta, P., Sen, A. K., and Starrett, D. (1973): “Notes On The Measurement Of Inequality.”Journal of Economic Theory 6: 180–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davies, J., and Hoy, M. (1994): “The Normative Significance Of Using Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance In Comparing Income Distributions.”Journal of Economic Theory 64: 520–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davies, J., and Hoy, M. (1995): “Making Inequality Comparisons When Lorenz Curves Intersect.”American Economic Review 85: 980–986.Google Scholar
  16. Donaldson, D., and Weymark, J.A. (1980): “A Single-Parameter Generalization Of The Gini Indices Of Inequality.”Journal of Economic Theory 22: 67–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Donaldson, D., and Weymark, J. A. (1983): “Ethically Flexible Gini Indices For Income Distributions In The Continuum.”Journal of Economic Theory 29: 353–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dutta, B., and Esteban, J. (1992): “Social Welfare And Equality.”Social Choice and Welfare 9: 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ebert, U. (1987): “Size And Distribution Of Income As Determinants Of Social Welfare.”Journal of Economic Theory 41: 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ebert, U. (1988): “Measurement Of Inequality: An Attempt At Unification And Generalization.”Social Choice and Welfare 5: 147–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eichhorn, W. (1988): “On A Class Of Inequality Measures.”Social Choice and Welfare 5: 171–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fields, G. S., and Fei, C. H. (1978): “On Inequality Comparisons.”Econometrica 46: 303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fishburn, P. C., and Willig, R. D. (1984): “Transfer Principles In Income Redistribution.”Journal of Public Economics 25: 323–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Foster, J. (1985): “Inequality Measurement.” InFair Allocation, Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics, edited by H. P. Young, volume 33, pages 31–68. Providence, R.I.: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
  25. Gastwirth, J. L. (1971): “A General Definition Of The Lorenz Curve.”Econometrica 39: 1037–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kakwani, N. C. (1980): “On A Class Of Poverty Measures.”Econometrica 48: 437–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kolm, S. C. (1969) “The Optimal Production Of Social Justice.” InPublic Economics, edited by J. Margolis, and H. Gutton, pages 145–200. London: Mcmillan.Google Scholar
  28. Kolm, S. C. (1976a): “Unequal Inequalities I.”Journal of Economic Theory 12: 416–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kolm, S. C. (1976b): “Unequal Inequalities II.”Journal of Economic Theory 13: 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lambert, P. J. (1993):The Distribution and Redistribution of Income: A Mathematical Analysis. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Mehran, F. (1976): “Linear Measures Of Income Inequality.”Econometrica 44: 805–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Menezes, C., Geiss, C., and Tressler, J. (1980): “Increasing Downside Risk.”American Economic Review 70: 921–932.Google Scholar
  33. Mosler, K., and Muliere, P. (1998): “Welfare Means and Equalizing Transfers.”Metron 55: 13–52.Google Scholar
  34. Moyes, P. (1987): “A New Concept Of Lorenz Domination.”Economic Letters 23: 203–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Muliere, P., and Scarsini, M. (1989): “A Note On Stochastic Dominance and Inequality Measures.”Journal of Economic Theory 49: 314–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pigou, A. C. (1912):Wealth and Welfare. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  37. Quiggin, J. (1993):Generalized Expected Utility Theory. The Rank Dependent Model. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rothschild, M., and Stiglitz, J. E. (1973): “Some Further Results On The Measurement Of Inequality.”Journal of Economic Theory 6: 188–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Safra, Z., and Segal, U. (1998): “Constant Risk Aversion.”Journal of Economic Theory 83: 19–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sen, A. K. (1973):On Economic Inequality. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [1997 expanded edition with the annex “On Economic Inequality After A Quarter Century” by Foster, J., and Sen, A.K.].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shorrocks, A. F. (1983): “Ranking Income Distributions.”Economica 50: 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shorrocks, A. F., and Foster, J. E. (1987): “Transfer Sensitive Inequality Measures.”Review of Economic Studies 14: 485–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wang, S. S., and Young, V. R. (1998): “Ordering Risks: Expected Utility Theory Versus Yaari's Dual Theory Of Risk.”Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 22: 145–161.Google Scholar
  44. Weymark, J. A. (1981): “Generalized Gini Inequality Indices.”Mathematical Social Sciences 1: 409–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Whitmore, G. A. (1970): “Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance.”American Economic Review 50: 457–459.Google Scholar
  46. Yaari, M. E. (1987): “The Dual Theory Of Choice Under Risk.”Econometrica 55: 99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yaari, M. E. (1988): “A Controversial Proposal Concerning Inequality Measurement.”Journal of Economic Theory 44: 381–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yitzhaki, S. (1982): “Stochastic Dominance, Mean Variance, and Gini's Mean Difference.”American Economic Review 72: 178–185.Google Scholar
  49. Yitzhaki, S. (1983): “On An Extension Of The Gini Inequality Index.”International Economic Review 24: 617–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zoli, C. (1997): “Intersecting Generalized Lorenz Curves and The Gini Index.” Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia Pubblica e Territoriale Universitá di Pavia n. 2/1997.Google Scholar
  51. Zoli, C. (1999): “Intersecting Generalized Lorenz Curves and The Gini Index.”Social Choice and Welfare 16: 183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EconomicsUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations