THE NON‐CONSTANCY OF EQUIVALENCE SCALES
Denis Conniffe
Abstract
Denis Conniffe
Abstract
Comparisons of households of differing composition are usually achieved through the use of equivalence scales. It is well known that the choice of scales can have considerable impact on the conclusions drawn from studies of welfare and poverty. There is a considerable literature on the theoretical issues relating to equivalence scales, but applied work on income distribution and related areas almost invariably takes scales to be constant irrespective of income. This paper focuses on the relation of scale to income, by applying theoretical analysis to some simple household types. The conclusion is that scales are not constant and that current practice should be changed.
OpenAlex reports 19 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Comparisons of households of differing composition are usually achieved through the use of equivalence scales. It is well known that the choice of scales can have considerable impact on the conclusions drawn from studies of welfare and poverty. There is a considerable literature on the theoretical issues relating to equivalence scales, but applied work on income distribution and related areas almost invariably takes scales to be constant irrespective of income. This paper focuses on the relation of scale to income, by applying theoretical analysis to some simple household types. The conclusion is that scales are not constant and that current practice should be changed.
Key concepts: Equivalence (formal languages), Economics, Econometrics, Poverty, Welfare, Income distribution, Distribution (mathematics), Scale (ratio)