Premium
U or Inverted‐U? That Is the Question
Author(s) -
Burger John D.
Publication year - 2001
Publication title -
review of development economics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.531
H-Index - 50
eISSN - 1467-9361
pISSN - 1363-6669
DOI - 10.1111/1467-9361.00114
Subject(s) - economics , index (typography) , argument (complex analysis) , inequality , economic inequality , dual (grammatical number) , neoclassical economics , positive economics , mathematical economics , dual economy , econometrics , mathematics , economic system , philosophy , mathematical analysis , biochemistry , chemistry , linguistics , world wide web , computer science
Fields ( The Economic Journal , vol. 103, 1993, pp. 1228–35) provides a forceful argument in favor of a U‐shaped path for inequality during a period of high‐income‐sector enlargement in a dual‐economy model. This paper explores the assumptions necessary to derive Fields’s controversial result and demonstrates that in fact a U‐shaped pattern is possible using the Atkinson index, but some bizarre assumptions about inequality aversion are required.