The Impact of Output Dinamics on Income Inequality in the Russian Regions

Authors

  • Natalia Vasilievna Vashchelyuk Lomonosov Moscow State University; Institute for Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17059/2015-4-11

Keywords:

income inequality, Kuznets hypothesis, economic development, social policy

Abstract

According to the well-known theoretical approach (the Kuznets hypothesis), one should expect a rise in income inequality on the early stages of economic development followed by its decline on the later phases. But there are theoretical models, which suggest alternative paths of income disparity. Empirical evidences of different authors is also controversial. This paper analyses the relationship between income inequality and output in Russian regions. Such study, based on modern econometric techniques, is novel for Russia. The author uses different economic indicators for Russian regions and estimates the fixed effects model for the period from 2000 to 2011. The results indicate that there is a positive relationship between income inequality measured by Gini coefficient and real per capita gross regional product. Hence, the distribution of benefits of economic growth and losses due to economic contraction was unequal in this period. We decline of inequality was attributable to interregional migration processes, the rise in social expenditure and the ratio of employees with a higher level of education to the employees with a lower level of education. However, the increase in the share of firms implemented technological, management and marketing innovations caused the upswing in income disparity due to monopolistic effects. Wus, the statement of J. F. Kennedy that “a rising tide shifts all boats” is not suitable for the developments in Russian regions in 2000-2011.

Author Biography

Natalia Vasilievna Vashchelyuk, Lomonosov Moscow State University; Institute for Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Master of Economics, PhD Student, Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University; Senior Research Associate, Centre for Research of Issues in Central Banking, Institute for Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (1, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991; bldg. 1, 82, Vernandskogo Ave., Moscow, 119571, Russian Federation; e-mail: vashchelyukn@gmail.com).

References

Ordin, O. (2001). Neravenstvo i ekonomicheskiy rost. Podkhodit li krivaya Kuznetsa dlya rossiyskoy ekonomiki? [Income inequality and economic growth: does Kuznets curve is adequate for Russian economy]. Finansy. Ru. Ekonomika i finansy, internet-resursy [Finance.Ru. Economy and finance]. Retrieved from: http://www.finansy.ru/publ/pmacro003.htm.

Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic Growth and Income Inequality. The American Economic Review, 45(1), 1–28.

Ahluwalia, M. (1976). Income Distribution and Development: Some Stylized Facts. The American Economic Review, 66(2), 128–135.

Anand, S. & Kanbur, S. (1993). The Kuznets Process and the Inequality-Development Relationship. Journal of Development Economics, 40(1), 25–52.

Robinson, S. (1976). A Note on the U Hypothesis Relating Income Inequality and Economic Development. The American Economic Review, 66(3), 437–440.

Moran, T. P. (2005). Kuznets’s Inverted U-Curve Hypothesis. The Rise, Demise, and Continued Relevance of a Socioeconomic Law. Sociological Forum, 20(2), 209–244.

Aghion, P. & Bolton, P. A (1997). Theory of Trickle-Down Growth and Development. The Review of Economic Studies, 64(2), 151–172.

Perotti, R. (1993). Political Equilibrium, Income Distribution, and Growth. The Review of Economic Studies, 60(4), 755–776.

Banerjee, V. & Newman, A. F. (1993). Occupational Choice and the Process of Development. Journal of Political Economy, 101(2), 274–298.

Greenwood, J. & Jovanovic, B. (1993). Financial Development, Growth, and the Distribution of Income. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 1076–1107.

Galor, O. & Tsiddon, D. (1997). Technological Progress, Mobility, and Economic Growth. The American Economic Review, 87(3), 363–382.

Barlevy, G. & Tsiddon, D. (2006). Earnings Inequality and the Business Cycle. European Economic Review, 50(1), 55–89.

Grimalda, G. & Vivarelli, M. (2010). One or Many Kuznets Curves? Short and Long Run Effects of the Impact of Skill-Biased Technological Change on Income Inequality. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 20(2), 265–306.

Deininger, K. & Squire, L. (1998). New ways of looking at old issues: Inequality and Growth. Journal of development economics, 57(2).

Li, H., Squire, L. & Zou, H. (2001). Explaining International and Intertemporal Variations in Income Inequality. The Economic Journal, 108(446), 26–43.

Barro, R. (1999). Inequality, Growth, and Investment. NBER, Working Paper, 7038, 52.

Jeong, H. (2008). An Assessment of Relationship between Growth and Inequality Using Micro Data from Thailand. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 12. No. Supplement S2 (Inequality), 155–197.

List, J. A. & Gallet, C. A. (1999). The Kuznets Curve: What Happens After the Inverted-U? Review of Development Economics, 3(2), 200–206.

Thornton, J. (2001). The Kuznets inverted-U hypothesis: panel data evidence from 96 countries. Applied Economics Letters, 8(1), 15–16.

Gershman, B. (2009). Neravenstvo dokhodov i ekonomicheskiy rost. Obzor ekonometricheskikh issledovaniy [Income inequality and economic growth: the survey of empirical studies]. Ekonomicheskaya nauka sovremennoy Rossii [Economic science of modern Russia], 2(45), 65–74.

Chambers, D. (2010). Does a rising tide raise all ships? The impact of growth on inequality. Applied Economics Letters, 17, 581–586.

Published

28.12.2015

How to Cite

Vashchelyuk, N. V. (2015). The Impact of Output Dinamics on Income Inequality in the Russian Regions. Economy of Regions, 11(4), 132–144. https://doi.org/10.17059/2015-4-11

Issue

Section

Research articles