Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Economic integration, within- and between-country inequality in Europe


Published on

Atanu Ghoshray, Mercedes Monfort, Javier Ordóñez
Open Seminar Eesti Pank
8 July 2019 - Tallinn

Published in: Economy & Finance
  • Yes you are right. There are many essay writing services available now. But almost services are fake and illegal. Only a genuine service will treat their customer with quality essay papers.
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Economic integration, within- and between-country inequality in Europe

  1. 1. Economic integration, within- and between-country inequality in Europe. Atanu Ghoshray Mercedes Monfort Javier Ord��ez Open Seminar Eesti Pank 8 July - Tallinn
  2. 2. Introduction: Inequality has been rising over the past three decades in the vast majority of OECD countries (OECD 2008, 2011, and 2015). Also, inequality has increased both between and within member states of the EU (European Commission, 2014). Further, studies such as Bouvet (2010) argue that inequality between EU countries has been a cause of overall inequality in the EU. Inequality has moved to the top of the policy agenda in many EU countries. There are worries that such persistently unbalanced sharing of the growth dividend will result in social resentment, populism, nacionalism, europhobia, xenophobia and protectionist sentiments all leading to political instability. In fact, it is common for public opinion and national politicians to blame the EU, and particularly the introduction of the euro, for the observed development in inequality. The deep economic crisis of 2008-2009 triggered further these sentiments.
  3. 3. Regarding the between-country component, one cannot simply assume that economic integration would lead to convergence in income and wages, and a consequent reduction in inequality between countries. There is a general perception that the benefits of integration are not equally shared among the participant EU countries, and this may threaten public support for the integration process. Within-country inequality in the EU is a matter of concern due to its effects on welfare and growth, paving the way for social resentment. It is important to assess whether these concerns are actually reflected in the results of an empirical analysis of the data and to identify whether institutional and economic events in the European economic integration process can explain the observed changes in inequality trends in Europe.
  4. 4. Aim of the paper: In this paper, we aim to estimate overall inequality trends for the EU as well as within-country and between-country inequality trends in Europe. Has inequality changed over time, and if so, at what rate? Has this rate remained constant over time, or have there been structural breaks that have caused the rates to vary? Have these breaks occurred at roughly the same time, thus pointing to institutional reasons as a cause of this change? Which type of inequality has been more profound: has within-country or between-country inequality contributed more to the overall trend? And finally, is inequality persistent for the EU overall, as well as the within- country and between-country components?
  5. 5. Changes in income distribution What may caused these changes in income distribution? 1. Technological change: Murphy (1989), European Comission (2008). 2. Financialisation: ILO (2008). 3. The welfare state retrechment: Rehm (2016), OECD (2011) 4. Economic integration/globalization: - globalization accentuates inequality: Firebaugh, 2003, Wade, 2004, Jayadev, 2007 - economic integration helps to close the inequality gap: Dollar and Kraay, 2002
  6. 6. How economic integration affects inequality? Bertola (2010) suggests three mechanisms: 1.Under economic and monetary integration, countries not only cannot conduct an independent monetary policy but fiscal policy is also constrained making difficult to stabilize economic activity. 2.Market integration can put in place new market forces and new sources of shocks with potential distributional effects. 3.Economic integration can also affect the implementation of redistributional policies.
  7. 7. The empirical literature on the effects of economic integration on inequality in Europe is not conclusive (Bouvet, 2010). Whether further integration lead to a deeper economic convergence has been subject of much debate in both the theoretical and the empirical literature. Ord��ez et al (2015) conclude that after years of ever-closer economic integration EU countries have converged to different steady states in economic efficiency (measured in terms of labour productivity), competitiveness (real unit labor costs) and income (per capita GDP). According to Monfort et al (2013, 2018), this lack of real economic convergence is also present in terms of GDP per capita, inequality and unemployment.
  8. 8. Inequality trends: The seminal work by Piketty (2001, 2003) led to a building up of interest in the long-run developments of inequality and similar efforts of building data sets spanning long time periods for many countries. Main result: almost all countries present a declining trend along the twenty century with an steady increase around 70s-80s (Piketty and Saez ,2014, Roine and Waldenstr�m, 2015, OECD, 2011).
  9. 9. This surprisingly homogeneous trended behavior of inequality, at least among the developed countries, has been cast into doubt: - the reversal of the downward trend after the 80s presents in fact great variability despite of being observed in most developed countries, Roine et. al. (2009) - the results on the long-run trend behaviour of inequality have been mostly based on a causal observation of the time series, which makes very difficult to determine exactly where the breaks are located for a particular country and the magnitude of the change in the trend (Ghoshray, et al 2018).
  10. 10. Ghoshray, et al 2018: - no clear conclusion can be made on the common location of inequality breaks. - inequality is rather persistent In this paper we analyze the trend behaviour of overall inequality and between and within-country inequality to identify possible breaks at the time of the major institutional and economic events in the process of convergence.
  11. 11. Data and results: To measure inequality in Europe we consider the Theil index measure of inequality based on quarterly GDP at constant PPP over the period 1960Q1 to 2017Q1. The data covers 12 European countries: Belgium, France, Finland, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK . The data has been obtained from Main Economic Indicators Database, OECD.
  12. 12. Why the Theil index? Theil index can be decomposed to analyze the trend behavior of: - the between-country component, which corresponds to the inequality we would observed if every citizen in a country would have the same income - the within-country component, which corresponds to the inequality that we would see if the average income of countries were all equalized.
  13. 13. Groups: - euro-zone peripheral countries (Italy, Spain and Portugal) - euro-zone core countries (France, Finland, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands) - non euro-zone countries (Norway, Sweden and the UK). Yes, a bit ad hoc but: - Since the purpose of this paper is to ascertain whether the economic integration process has had any effect on the between-country inequality, it seems reasonable to distinguish between countries involve in deeper economic integration (euro-zone countries) from those subject to a lesser extent integration (non-euro-zone countries). Also, it seems reasonable to further distinguish between cohesion (or later named peripheral countries) and non- cohesion countries. - This later classification is also supported by previous empirical results who point out that peripheral and core countries convergence to different equilibrium in terms of inequality (Monfort et al, 2018).
  14. 14. Why countries? First, according to Bouvet (2010) between-country inequality shapes the dynamic of overall inequality in Europe. Second, most of the debate on the impact of the single market and the common currency has focused on national economic conditions. This paper adds to the literature on income inequality in Europe by making a robust test for structural breaks and persistence in overall, within-country and between-country inequality of twelve European countries.
  15. 15. First, we test for structural breaks in the series using robust methods that are agnostic regarding the stationarity or nonstationarity of the series.
  16. 16. Second, we test for the magnitude and sign of the trends.
  17. 17. Third, we test for the degree of persistence in the analysed series.
  18. 18. Concluding remarks First, neither the economic integration process nor the economic crises suffered over the last forty years caused a change in inequality of the importance of the developments in the 70s. Second, inequality can experience important compositional effects that, despite its magnitude, do not cause a structural change in the overall inequality. Specifically, the introduction of the euro was coupled with important re-compositional effects in the within- and between-country components of inequality that did not translate to a structural break in overall inequality. Third, shocks to inequality tend to persist and specific policy measure need to be implemented both at national and EU level to cope with the negative effects of rising inequality.