Advertisement

Statistical Methods & Applications

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 403–425 | Cite as

A new mobility index for transition matrices

  • C. FerrettiEmail author
  • P. Ganugi
Article

Abstract

In this work we construct a mobility index able to grasp the prevailing direction in the evolution of a given set of statistical units. We consider the case of dynamics ruled by a transition matrix, whose states are based on an ordered economic variable (firm size or income, among others) such that the future position of an individual can be better or worse than the current one. The existing indices measure only the absolute value of mobility, without providing information about the main direction in the dynamics. We propose here a whole family of directional indices defined as functions of the transition matrix, so that their absolute value measures the intensity of mobility, and their sign (\(+/-\)) represents the prevailing direction towards improvement/worsening in the dynamics under study.

Keywords

Mobility index Prevailing direction Transition matrix  Ordered variable 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Provincia di Prato for the ASIA-ISTAT dataset, and to CRISP (Milano) for the C.OBB. dataset. They also wish to thank E. Fabrizi and the anonymous referees for their constructive comments and suggestions.

References

  1. Adelman IG (1958) A stochastic analysis of the size distribution of firms. J Am Stat Assoc 53(284):893–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcalde-Unzu J, Ezcurra R, Pascual P (2006) Mobility as a movement: a measuring proposal based on transition matrices. Econ Bull 4(22):1–12Google Scholar
  3. Atkinson AB (1970) On the measurement of inequality. J Econ Theory 2:244–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barba Navaretti G, Castellani D, Pieri F (2012) Changing class: size transition in European firms. http://www.alde.es/encuentros/anteriores/xveea/trabajos/b/pdf/34.pdf
  5. Bartholomew DJ (1973) Stochastic models for social processes, 2nd edn. Wiley, LondonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Boeri T, Cramer U (1992) Employment growth, incumbents and entrants: evidence from Germany. Int J Ind Org 10(4):545–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonini CP, Simon HA (1958) The size distribution of business firms. Am Econ Rev 48(4):607–617Google Scholar
  8. Bourguignon F, Morrisson C (2002) Inequality among World Citizens. Am Econ Rev 92(4):727–744Google Scholar
  9. Champernowne DG (1953) A model of income distribution. Econ J 63(250):318–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cipollini F, Ferretti C, Ganugi P (2012) Firm size dynamics in an Industrial District: the Mover-Stayer model in action. In: Di Ciaccio A, et al. (eds) Advanced statistical methods for the analysis of large data-sets. Springer, Berlin, pp 443–452Google Scholar
  11. Dardanoni V (1993) Measuring social mobility. J Econ Theory 61(2):372–394zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fieds GS, Ok EA (1996) The meaning and measurement of income mobility. J Econ Theory 71:349–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferretti C (2012) Mobility as prevailing direction for transition matrices. Stat Appl 10(1):67–78MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Fougere D, Kamionka T (2003) Bayesian inference for the Mover–Stayer model of continuous time. J Appl Econ 18:697–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frydman H, Kadam A (2004) Estimation in the continuous time Mover–Stayer model with an application to bond rating migration. Appl Stoch Models Bus Ind 20(2):155–170MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frydman H, Kallberg J, Kao D (1985) Testing the adequacy of Markov chain and Mover–Stayer model as representation of credit behavior. Oper Res 33(6):1203–1214zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Geweke J, Robert CM, Gary AZ (1986) Mobility indices in continuous time markov chains. Econometrica 54(6):1407–1423MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Maddison A (1995) Monitoring the world economy. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  19. Parker SC, Rougier J (2001) Measuring social mobility as unpredictability. Economica 68:63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shorrocks AF (1976) Income mobility and the Markov assumption. Econ J 86:556–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shorrocks AF (1978) The measurement of mobility. Econometrica 46(5):1013–1024zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shorrocks AF (1982) On the distance between income distributions. Econometrica 50:1337–1339zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sommers P, Conlinsk J (1979) Eigenvalue immobility measure for Markov chains. J Math Soc 6:253–276zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tursi A, Varesi PA (2010) Lineamenti del Diritto del Lavoro. CEDAM, PaduaGoogle Scholar
  25. Tursi A, Varesi PA (2013) Istituzioni di Diritto del Lavoro, 6th edn. CEDAM, PaduaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economic and Social SciencesUniversità Cattolica del Sacro CuorePiacenzaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Industrial EngineeringUniversity of ParmaParmaItaly

Personalised recommendations