We have, up to now, focussed mostly on measuring and comparing cardinal indices of poverty and equity. As discussed in Chapter 4, this has several expositional advantages. The greatest of these advantages is probably that of focussing on only one (or a few) numerical assessments of poverty and equity. It is then relatively straightforward to compare poverty and equity across distributions just by comparing the values of these cardinal indices. The conclusions arc then (seemingly) “clear-cut”.
KeywordsPoverty Line Ethical Judgement Social Welfare Function Distributive Index Poverty Index
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Beck, J. (1994): “An Experimental Test of Preferences for the Distribution of Income and Individual Risk Aversion,” Eastern Economic Journal, 20, 131–45.Google Scholar
- Blackorby, C., W. Bossert, and D. Donaldson (1999): “Income Inequality Measurement: The Normative Approach,” in Handbook of income inequality measurement. With a foreword by Amartya Sen, ed. by J. Silber, Boston; Dordrecht and London: Kluwer Academic, Recent Economic Thought Series, 133–57.Google Scholar
- Chakravarty, S. (1999): “Measuring Inequality: The Axiomatic Approach,” in Handbook of income inequality measurement. With a foreword by Amartya Sen, ed. by J. Silber, Boston; Dordrecht and London: Kluwer Academic, Recent Economic Thought, 163–84.Google Scholar
- Nozick, R. (1974): Anarchy, State and Utopia, Oxford: Basil Black well.Google Scholar
- — (1997): “On Opportunity Inequality Measurement,” Journal of Economic Theory, 77, 300–329.Google Scholar
- Okun, A. (1975): “Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff,” Tech. rep., Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
- Rawls, J. (1971): A Theory of Justice, Cambridge: MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (1982): “Equality of What?” in Choice, Welfare and Measurement, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, vol. Chapter 16.Google Scholar