Всего статей в данном разделе : 9
Cambridge Scale Scores for CASOC Groupings; Cambridge Scale Scores for Official Classifications 1961-1991 [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 26-05-2003Ken Prandy Working Papers (Cambridge Studies in Social Research). 2002.
Сайт содержит работы К. Пранди - специалиста по измерению социального неравенства, работающего в рамках кембриджской и оксфордской систем классификации социально-профессиональных групп. Другие препринты Социологической группы социальных исследований Кебриджского университета доступны только по платному заказу.
Опубликовано на портале: 03-12-2003Simon Commander, Andrei Tolstopiatenko, Ruslan Yemtsov William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series. 1997. No. 42.
Among the many popular images of the Russian transition, none cast a more dramatic shadow than the apparently rapid transformation of an entire system from one characterised by low inequality and largely absent poverty to one marked by extremes of deprivation and prosperity. Once hailed as a salutary contrast to the extremes of well-being so characteristic of many economies at comparable levels of income, Russia now exhibits the tell-tale inequities that mark, for example, many Latin American economies. How accurate is this representation, both in its depiction of the situation pre-transition, let alone the consequences of recent changes? This paper is an attempt to answer these questions in as precise a manner as possible. The paper is organised as follows. Section 1 gives a brief description of the datasets — primarily the six rounds of a large household survey, the Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS) - that we use in this paper. Section 2 sets out the initial conditions that obtained in the Former Soviet Union and Russia and the picture that emerges from use of official statistics. These are shown to be seriously misleading in a number of key respects. Section 3 deals with the channels of redistribution that are likely to be present in the transition and surveys the evidence available from both aggregate data and firm-level information. In Section 4 the key channels are formalised in a two sector model of transition in which the reallocation of labour and capital across state and private sectors is seen as the determining feature of transition. The model is primarily concerned with labour allocation and hence can provide the paths of inequality and poverty over the transition primarily associated with labour income. Some simulations are presented which provide a set of simple benchmarks for understanding the size of likely effects from both within-sector inequality as also through restructuring and closure probabilities for state firms and the relative productivity of both state and private sectors. Section 5 turns to the empirical findings that emerge from a detailed look at the household surveys, including the factors driving the changes in inequality. Section 6 looks at how stable the transitions over the income distribution have been and, in particular, takes a closer look at groups of stable winners and losers. Section 7 turns to the measurement of poverty and the results that emerge from the household survey regarding both expenditure and income measured poverty. We also look at the characteristics of the poor. Section 8 concludes.
Comparing Social Stratification Schemas: CAMSIS, CSP-CH, Goldthorpe, ISCO-88, Treiman, and Wright [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 25-01-2003Manfred Max Bergman, Dominique Joye
The purpose of this article is to inform researchers in the social and political sciences about the main social stratification scales in use today. Six stratification schemas are described in this text: the Cambridge Social Interaction and Stratification Scale (CAMSIS), Swiss Socio-Professional Categories (CSP-CH), John H. Goldthorpes class schema, the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO-88), Donald J. Treimans prestige scale, and Erik Olin Wrights class structure. Their theoretical backgrounds and assumptions are discussed, as are their structural and methodological aspects. General problems of contemporary stratification research are covered, and suggestions for future research directions within this field are proposed.
Опубликовано на портале: 31-01-2003Lawrence E. Raffalovich
This paper uses annual time-series data on a sample of thirty-nine countries to investigate the impact of inequality on growth over the 1950-1998 period. Our inequality measure is the property-income share of GDP, selected because it is both the means and the motive for investment, the proximate cause of growth in most theories. Cross-national time-series regression analysis of the pooled data finds only limited evidence that inequality increases subsequent growth, and only in a few countries. There is no evidence that this effect can be generalized beyond these few nations. The argument that inequality promotes economic growth remains largely unsupported.
Опубликовано на портале: 12-01-2004A. F. Shorrocks Econometrica. 1982. Vol. 50. No. 1. P. 193-212.
This paper disaggregates the income of individuals or households into different factor components, such as earnings, investment income, and transfer payments, and considers how to assess the contributions of these sources to total income inequality. In the approach adopted, a number of basic principles of decomposition are proposed and their implications for the assignment of component contributions are examined.
Опубликовано на портале: 13-12-2003Anthony B. Atkinson, Lee Rainwater, Timothy Smeeding Luxembourg Income Study Working Paper Series. 1995. No. 121.
The aim of this paper is to assemble empirical evidence about the personal distribution of income, and the trends in income inequality over time, in the countries of Europe in the 1980s. It encompasses fifteen European countries: the Nordic countries, Switzerland, and all 12 members of the European Community (in 1994) apart from Greece. The United States is included as a point of reference.
Опубликовано на портале: 03-12-2003Ruslan Yemtsov World Bank Poverty Net. 2002.
This paper analyzes regional data on inequality and poverty in Russia over the period 1994-2000 using published series from the regionally representative Household Budget Survey. The paper finds that the share of inequality in Russia coming from the between-regions component is large (close to a third of the total inequality), growing over time, and accounting for most of the increase in the national inequality over 1994-2000. The paper demonstrates an absence of inter-regional convergence in incomes across Russian regions using various techniques, such as beta, sigma convergence and the transition matrix approach. On the other hand, the paper finds an evidence of convergence in the inequality within regions, which is trended towards an internationally high level. Based on these two findings, the paper projects dynamics of inequality and poverty in Russia over a ten years time horizon. Projections show that if the observed trend is to continue in the future, by 2010 the absolute majority of the Russia’s poor will be concentrated in few permanently impoverished regions, while relatively more affluent regions will become virtually free of poverty. Finally, the paper relates fluctuations in the inequality within regions to a set of factors determining the speed of restructuring at the regional level, classified into four broad categories: endowments and initial conditions, preferences, policies, and shocks; among these factors short run fluctuations of the unemployment rate are revealed as significant and strong correlates of inequality.
Sociological Marxism in Jonathan Turner (ed), Handbook of Sociological Theory (Plenum: forthcoming) [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 01-02-2003Michael Burawoy, Erik Olin Wright
We have argued in this paper that the main theoretical ideas of Marxism can be grouped into three broad clusters: a theory of dynamics and destiny of capitalism -- historical materialism; a theory of the contradictory reproduction of capitalism sociological Marxism; and a normative theory of emancipatory alternatives.
Опубликовано на портале: 23-04-2004Лилия Николаевна Овчарова, Евгений Владимирович Турунцев, Ирина Ивановна Корчагина EERC Working Papers. 1998.
Авторы делают попытку переоценить официальные данные о масштабах бедности в России, применяя стандартную методологию определения бедности вместо методологических подходов, используемых российскими государственными институтами (Госкомстатом, Минэкономики, Минтруда). Вместо критерия душевых денежных доходов для сопоставления с величиной прожиточного минимума используется показатель душевых потребительских расходов семьи, включающих в себя не только денежные расходы домохозяйств, но и денежную оценку потребления продуктов питания, произведенных в личном подсобном хозяйстве. В докладе предложена широкая концепция бедности, с учетом наличия таких важнейших составных частей экономического потенциала домохозяйств, как движимое и недвижимое имущество.