 China’s Inequality is Important – but which Inequality?No 2016-20, CSAE Working Paper Series from Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford Abstract: This think-piece questions the normative value in the Chinese case of standard measures of aggregate income inequality such as the Gini coefficient. Evidence is adduced that people have narrow frames of reference and that they distinguish between income inequalities that they perceive to be fair and those that they perceive to be unfair. It is suggested that value judgements about what is fair or unfair can be guided by people’s own perceptions. People’s perceptions of unfairness can also be important to a government concerned to avoid social instability. The estimation of happiness functions can help to make the relevant distinctions. Examples are given of how fair and unfair inequalities might be identified. Unfairness might be more strongly perceived and felt in inequalities of economic power than in inequalities of income, although the former can in turn result in inequalities of income. An argument is made for China researchers to extend inequality research and research instruments towards an economics of fairness and unfairness. Keywords: Fairness; Frames of reference; Gini coefficient; Inequality of income; Inequality of economic power; Unfairness (search for similar items in EconPapers) There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:csa:wpaper:2016-20 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in CSAE Working Paper Series from Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.