|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Effect of Income Inequality on Economic Growth | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Paper Id :
16891 Submission Date :
2022-12-16 Acceptance Date :
2022-12-21 Publication Date :
2022-12-25
This is an open-access research paper/article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. For verification of this paper, please visit on
http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/remarking.php#8
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Abstract |
The relationship between income inequality and GDP growth is matter of big concern especially in those countries in which income inequality has been increasing continuously. The Kuznets inverted U-curve hypothesis regarding this relationship states that income disparity increases initially as income increases, reaches at the peak and thereafter, it decreases steadily. This pattern of relationship between income inequality and GDP growth forms Kuznets inverted U- shaped curve. The validity of this hypothesis is further examined by various economists and revealed contradictory conclusions. An effort is made to re-examine the Kuznets hypothesis in context of Indian economy as Indian economy has emerged as fastest growing economy among the developing economies. The data of Gini index and GDP per capita at constant price are taken from World Bank for the selected years during the period from1977 to 2019. The result of this study revealed that a positive and significant relationship exists between income inequality and GDP per capita but the analysis does not support strongly to the Kuznets inverted U-curve hypothesis regarding relationship between income inequality and GDP growth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Keywords | Income, Inequality, GDP, Growth. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Introduction |
The unequal distribution of wealth and income among people refers income inequality. The income inequality is result of increasing income concentration at the top and the gap between rich and poor people has widened significantly in recent years.
The income inequality leads to disparities for accessing education and health care facilities which are important ingredients of human development and results in the form of lower level of human development. Further, higher income inequality also leads low level of savings and higher capital outflow which leads fall in economy’s productive capacity and capital formation as well as demand for goods and services and thus, always hampers growth prospects of the economy. Therefore, the relationship between income inequality and GDP growth is matter of big concern especially in those countries in which income inequality has been increasing continuously.
The Kuznets inverted U-curve hypothesis regarding this relationship states that income disparity increases initially as income increases, reaches at the peak and thereafter, it decreases steadily. This pattern of relationship between income inequality and GDP growth forms Kuznets inverted U- shaped curve. The Kuznets’ hypothesis was derived on the basis of limited number of developed nations and backward nations. The validity of this hypothesis is further examined by various economists and revealed contradictory conclusions. For example, Ahluwalia (1976) and Barro (2008) validated the hypothesis in their studies by undertaking cross sectional data and appropriate methodology, while, conclusions of the studies carried out by Saith (1983) and Anand & Kanbur (1993) did not support the validity of the hypothesis.
Further, many studies revealed that certain level of income inequality means the Gini coefficient value between 0.25-0.40 always promotes the growth while the higher income inequality means the Gini coefficient value of 0.45 and above has negative effects on economic growth. Thus, it is very interesting to re-examine the Kuznets hypothesis in context of Indian economy as Indian economy has emerged as fastest growing economy among the developing nations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Objective of study | To examine the relationship between income inequality and GDP growth. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Review of Literature | Kuznets (1955) tested the relationship between
income inequality and economic growth and revealed a positive relationship at early
stage of economic development but it become negative during advanced stages of
economic development and concluded that inverted U shaped curve relationship
exist between income inequality and economic growth at different level of
economic development of economies. Perotti R. (1993) examined the effect of income
inequality on economic growth on the basis of both the time series and cross
sectional data by assuming that investment in human capital is a source of
economic growth and result shows inverted-U shaped relationship between levels
of inequality and income levels in cross-sections data but not necessarily in
time series data. Alesina and Rodrik (1994) examined the relationship
between income inequality and economic growth by undertaking data of 46 nations
during the period from 1960 to 1985 and found negative relationship between
income inequality and economic growth. Persson and Tabellini (1994) also
examined the relationship by undertaking data of 56 nations for the same time
period and found similar conclusions. Falkinger J and J. Zweimüller (1997) examined the effect
of income disparity on per-capita growth and revealed that the relationship may
be positive or negative depending on whether productivity growth is positively or
negatively related to product variety. The study further revealed that a
significant negative relationship exist between income inequality and economic
growth. Deininger and Squire (1998) used new cross-country data
on income and asset (land) distribution in order to examine the relationship
between economic growth and inequality and to show its effect on poverty during
the process of economic development. The results of the study revealed
significant relationship between initial asset inequality and long-term growth
and it is also found that inequality tends to reduce the growth of poor but not
of the rich people. Further, the results slightly supported the Kuznets
hypothesis. Barro (2000) examined the relationship between income
inequality and economic growth and found that income inequality has different
effects on economic growth at different level of economy’s economic
development. The study revealed that higher income inequality impedes economic
growth in backward nations, while encourages economic growth in advanced
countries. Kristin J. Forbes (2000) examined the effect of income
inequality on economic growth and revealed a significant positive relationship
between income inequality and economic growth during short and medium
term. Panizza (2002) examined the association between
inequality and economic growth by using a cross-state panel data for the United
States during the period from 1940 to 80 and result of the paper revealed only
negative association between inequality and growth but the relationship did not
found robust. Rangel L.A. et al. (2002) examined the effect of income
inequality on economic growth by using Akaike information criterion and
undertaking data for the period from 1991 to 2000 of Brazil. The result of the
study confirmed an inverted-U shaped relationship exists between income
inequality and economic growth in Brazil. Knowles (2005) examined the relationship between income
inequality and economic growth by undertaking data of 40 nations for the period
from 1960 to1990. The result of the study revealed significant negative
tradeoff between Income inequality and economic growth in low-income economies,
however, this relationship was found insignificant in high and middle income
economies. S. Voitchovsky (2005) investigated the relationship
between income distribution and economic growth and revealed that inequality at
the top end of the distribution is positively related to the economic growth
and inequality at lower down the distribution is negatively related to growth. Wan et al. (2006), measured the impact of inequality on
investment, education, and in turn eventually on economic growth in the post
reform era of China for the period 1987-2001 by undertaking polynomial inverse
lag framework and the results of the study revealed nonlinear and is
negative relationship between income inequality and economic growth. Gunther Rehme (2007) examined the relationship between
education, economic growth and income inequality and it was found in the study
that higher education leads to increase in both economic growth and income
inequality first and then leads to decrease in both economic growth and income
inequality, however, a significant relationship does not exists between
income inequality and economic growth. Bhorat and Vander Westhuizen (2009) investigated the
relationship between economic growth, poverty and inequality during the period
from 1995 to 2005 in South Africa and revealed a positive relationship between
income inequality and economic growth. Castello-Climent (2010) examined the effect of income
inequality and human capital inequality on economic growth in different regions
across the world and the results of the study revealed that income and human
capital inequality affects economic growth negatively in low and middle income
economies and positively in the higher-income countries. Shahbaz M. (2010) analyzed the effect of income
inequality on economic growth by undertaking annual time series data of
Pakistan for the period from 1971 to 2005 using ARDL cointegration approach and
the results revealed Kuznets inverted‐U shaped and
inverted S‐shaped curve
relationship between income inequality and economic growth. Shin I (2012), examined the relationship between income
inequality and economic growth with the help with a stochastic optimal growth
model and concluded that a negative relationship exist between income
inequality and economic growth in the early stage of economic development and a
positive relationship exist between income inequality and economic growth in a
near steady state of economic development. Fawad Fazi et al. (2014) assessed the effect of income
inequality on economic growth by undertaking international data for the period
1960- 2010 through using dynamic panel technique and revealed that a
significant negative relationship exist between income inequality and economic
growth in low income developing nations and a significant positive relationship
exist between income inequality and economic exist in high-income developing
nations. Petersen Thie and Ulrich Schoof (2015) examined the
relationship between income inequality and economic growth and found that
rising income inequality generates both growth-promoting and growth-dampening
effects and it was also found that in highly developed nations like Germany,
Japan and the Unites States, increasing income inequality hinders economic
growth. Galina Kolev and Judith Niehues (2016) examined the
tradeoff between income inequality and economic growth by using GMM dynamic
panel estimator system and found a non-linear relationship between income
inequality and growth for both developed and developing economies. Further, a
negative relationship between income inequality and economic growth was found
only for less-developed countries and countries with high income inequality. Majeed M.T. (2016) examined the effect of income
inequality on economic growth in Pakistan using ARDL approach to cointegration
by undertaking annual time series data for the period from 1975 to 2013 and
revealed that inequality has positive effect on annual economic growth in
Pakistan. The result also shows that poverty has negative effect on growth. Castells-Quintana D. and V. Royuela (2017) examined the
relationship between income inequality and economic growth and revealed that
both negative and positive relationship between income inequality and long-run
economic growth. Kandek Barbara and Veronika Kajling (2017) examined the
relationship between regional inequality and local economic growth in 357
metropolitan cities in USA during the period from 2010 to 2015. The result
shows that a positive and significant relationship exists between inequality
and GDP Per Capita Growth rates but a negative and insignificant relationship
exists between inequality and GDP Per capita levels. Niyimbanira F. (2017) examined the relationship between
economic growth and income inequality and poverty by undertaking secondary data
of 18 local municipalities of Mpumalanga province in South Africa for the
period from 1996 to 2004. By using fixed effect and pool regression models,
revealed that that high economic growth leads to decline in poverty but rise in
income inequality. Benos Nikos and Stelios Karagiannis (2018) explored the
relationship between economic growth and income inequality by undertaking human
and physical capital accumulation using U.S. state-level data for the period
from 1929 to 2013. The result shows that no relationship exists between income
inequality and economic growth in both short and long run in the United States.
The results of this study corroborates the unified theory of inequality and
growth in which the relationship between economic growth and inequality becomes
insignificant in the latest stages of economic development that the United
States experienced during the period of study. Bruckner Markus and Daniel Lederman (2018) examined the
relationship between inequality and gross domestic product per capita growth in
the context of countries’ initial incomes by using a panel model. The result of
the model shows that higher income inequality positively affects the
transitional growth in low-income countries and negatively affects the
transitional growth in high-income countries. Braun M. et al. (2019), examined the relationship between
inequality and growth given financial development levels of the economy by
using panel dataset of large number of nations. The result shows that negative
relationship exists between income inequality and economic growth rate in those
nations in which level of financial development is low and a positive
relationship exists in those nations in which level of financial development is
high. Thus, author suggested that effect of high-income inequality on economic
growth can be controlled by improving financial markets. Buyume Ekonomik et al. (2019), studied the relationship
between income disparity and economic growth by using secondary data and
literature and revealed that rising income inequality is the problem of all the
nations across the world and it cannot be reduced only by economic growth
rather all nations should review their economic policies and should adopt such
economic policies which provide equal opportunities to all member of society. Royuela V. et al. (2019) examined the effect of income
inequality on economic growth in OECD regions for the period from 2003 to 13. A
negative relationship was found between inequalities and economic growth during
the starting phase of economic crisis in the region. Shen Chengfang and X Zhao (2022) analyzed the relationship between income inequality and economic growth. The result shows that economic growth is being hampered by higher income inequality at low-income levels rather than at high-income levels, but, the relationship become insignificant if the fertility rate or country differences are controlled. S.G Topuz (2022) examined the relationship between income inequality and economic growth for the periods between 1980 and 2017 in 143 nations. The nations are categorized into two groups based on income levels by using panel data techniques. The result shows that a negative relationship exists between income inequality and economic growth in developing countries as high income inequality adversely affect human capital investments in these nations but on the other hand, the relationship becomes positive in developed nations as high income inequality encourages savings in these nations. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Methodology | Gini coefficient as a measure of income inequality and growth rate of GDP per capita as a measure of economic growth are undertaken for analysis. The data are taken from World Bank at constant prices. Correlation and simple linear regression model is used to examine the relationship between income inequality and economic growth and effect of income inequality on GDP per capita growth rate. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Result and Discussion |
India’s GDP per capita at Constant prices for selected
years, the average growth rate of GDP per capita for selected years compared to
previous years and value of Gini coefficient for selected years are
shown in table 1 Table 1: GDP Per Capita and Gini Coefficient
Source: World Bank The gross domestic product (GDP) at constant prices is
estimated to be at Rs. 20993 in the year 1977 thereafter increased continuously
and estimated to be at Rs. 106234 in the year 12019 as shown in the
following chart -1. During the period from 1977 to 2019, the GDP per capita
average growth of Indian economy is showing fluctuating trends around so called
‘Hindu Growth Rate’, however, overall average growth rate accelerated excluding
some years as shown in the following chart -2. The major focus of policy makers was remained to
accelerate the growth of Indian Economy but simultaneously income inequality
was also become a major problem. For example, the value of Gini
coefficient was accounted 33.30 percent in 1977 and it fell down to 31.70
percent in 1993 thereafter increased to 35.70 percent in 2019, thus, it was
fluctuated slightly but overall showing increasing trend as shown in the
following chart-3 In order to examine the relationship between GDP per
capita and income inequality, first of all correlation between GDP per capita
and Gini Coefficient is measured. Secondly, to investigate the effect of income
inequality on GDP per capita, following two models are estimated: OLS Model 1: GDPpc = ɑ + ßGini Coefficient + μ
-----(1) OLS Model 2: GDPpc growth = δ + λ Gini Coefficient (%) + μ
------(2) Table 2: Correlation between GDPpc and Gini
Coefficient
Source: Authors Calculation As shown in table 2, there is perfect positive
correlation between GDP per capita and Gini Coefficient implying that income
inequality and GDP per capita are positively related to each other. The
association between GDP per capita and income inequality is also shown by the
trend line shown in chart 4. Table 3: Effect of Income Inequality
Source: Authors Calculation Following char -4 showing graphical relationship between
GDP per capita and Gini Coefficient which is not one of the perfect positive
and it has varied during selected time period. However, the empirical result shown in table 3 shows that relationship between GDP per capita and income inequality is positive and significant implying that as Income Inequality increases, the GDP Per Capita also increases. This follows that the major concern for policy makers was to accelerate economic growth without addressing the problem of inequality, therefore this inequitable economic growth further leads to widen the gap between rich and poor. Further, the effect of Gini Coefficient on GDP per capita
growth rate is also analyzed. The empirical results shown in table 3 revealed a
positive relationship but it found insignificant. As shown graphically in the following chart 5, the relationship is seems strange but its approximation leads the shape of inverted U curve, which shows initially as Gini Coefficient increases, the GDP per capita growth rate increases then reaches at maximum and thereafter starts to decline. This means a certain level of inequality is necessary to accelerate the growth but after achieving certain level of GDP growth, efforts should also made to control inequality along with high growth of GDP. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Conclusion |
The empirical results show that both the income inequality and GDP per capita are increasing simultaneously and a positive and significant relationship exists between income inequality and GDP per capita implying that GDP per capita has increased during the period under analysis but simultaneously the gap between rich and poors also increased during the same period. Further the effect of income inequality on GDP per capita growth rate found positive and insignificant and does not leads to normal shape of inverted U shape curve, however, its approximation seems shape like the inverted U shaped curve. Therefore analysis does not support strongly the Kuznets inverted U shaped relationship between income inequality and GDP per capita growth rate. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
References | 1. Aghion P., Howitt P., Murtin F. (2010). The relationship between health and growth: when Lucas meets Nelson–Phelps. NBER Working paper series: 15813.
2. Ahluwalia (1976). Inequality, Poverty and development. Journal of Development Economics, 1976, vol. 3, issue 4: 307-342
3. Alesina A., Perotti R. (1996). Income distribution, political instability and investment. European Economic Review, 40(6): 1203–1228.
4. Alesina A., Rodrik D. (1994). Distributive politics and economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(2): 465–490.
5. Anand S. & S.M.R. Kanbur (1993). Inequality and development A critique. Journal of Development Economics, 41(1):19-43.
6. Anand S. & S.M.R. Kanbur (1993). The Kuznets process and the inequality- development relationship. Journal of Development Economics, 40(1):25-52.
7. Barro, Robert J., (2008). "Inequality and Growth Revisited." Working Papers on Regional Economic Integration 11, Asian Development Bank.
8. Barro RJ (2000). Inequality and growth in a panel of countries. J Econ Growth, 5(1): 5–32.
9. Benos, Nikos, and Stelios Karagiannis. (2018). Inequality and growth in the United States: Why physical and human capital matter. Economic inquiry, 56, no. 1: 572-619.
10. Braun M. et al. (2019). Does finance alter the relation between inequality and growth? Economic Inquiry, 57(1):410–428.
11. Brueckner, Markus & Lederman, Daniel, (2018). Inequality and economic growth: the role of initial income. Policy Research Working Paper Series 8467, World Bank.
12. Castello-Climent A (2010). Inequality and growth in advanced economies: an empirical investigation. J Econ Inequal, 8:293–321.
13. Castells-Quintana, D., Royuela, V. (2017). Tracking positive and negative effects of inequality on long-run growth. Empir Econ 53, 1349–1378 (2017).
14. Cervellati M, Sunde U (2009). Life expectancy and economic growth: the role of the demographic transition. Discussion Paper No. 4160, Institute for the Study of Labor, pp 1–51.
15. Chengfang Shen & Xindong Zhao (2022). How does income inequality affects economic growth at different income levels?. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, DOI: 10.1080/1331677X.2022.2080742.
16. Deaton A (2003). Health, inequality, and economic development. J Econ Lit, 41(1):113–115.
17. Deininger K, Squire L (1998). New ways of looking at old issues: inequality and growth. J Dev Econ, 57:259–287.
18. Falkinger J, Zweimüller J (1997). The impact of income inequality on product diversity and economic growth. Metroeconomica, 48(3): 211–237.
19. Fawad Fazi et al. (2014). A refinement of the relationship between economic growth and income inequality. Applied Economics, 46:27, 3351-3361.
20. Forbes, Kristin, J. (2000). "A Reassessment of the Relationship between Inequality and Growth." American Economic Review, 90 (4): 869-887.
21. Galor O (2009). Inequality and economic development: the modern perspective, (inter-national library of critical writings in economics 237).
22. Günther Rehme, (2006). Education, Economic Growth and Measured Income Inequality. No 428, LIS Working papers, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
23. Kolev G, Niehues J (2016). The inequality-growth relationship an empirical re-assessment. IW Report 7, working paper version, IDW, Köln, pp 1–26.
24. Kuznets S (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. Am Econ Rev, 45:1–28.
25. Lee W, Roemer JE (1998). Income Distribution, Redistributive Politics, and Economic Growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 3(3): 217–240.
26. Majeed M.T. (2016). Economic growth and income inequality nexus: an empirical analysis for Pakistan. Kashmir Econ. Rev, 25(1):1–12.
27. Niyimbanira, Ferdinand. (2017). "Analysis of the impact of economic growth on income inequality and poverty in South Africa: the case of Mpumalanga Province." International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues 7, no. 4 (2017): 254-261.
28. Panizza, Ugo. (2002). Income Inequality and Economic Growth: Evidence from American Data. Journal of Economic Growth 7, 25–41.
29. Perotti R (1996). Growth, income distribution, and democracy: what the data say. J Econ Growth, 1(2): 149–187.
30. Persson T, Tabellini G (1994). Is inequality harmful for growth?. Am Econ Rev, 84(3):600–621.
31. Petersen T, Schoof U (2015). The impact of income inequality on economic growth. Impulse # 2015/05, Future Social Market Economy, Bertelsmann Stiftung, pp 1–12.
32. Rangel L.A. et al. (2002). Economic Growth and Income Inequality in Brazil: Analysing the Comparable Minimum Areas. Brazilian Institute for Applied Economic Research and University of Brasilia; Brazil, Working Paper.
33. Roberto Perotti, (1993). Political Equilibrium, Income Distribution, and Growth. The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 60, Issue 4, Pages 755–776.
34. Royuela V. et al. (2019) The short-run relationship between inequality and growth: evidence from OECD regions during the Great Recession. Regional Studies, 53:4, 574-586.
35. Saith, Ashwini (1983). 'Development and distribution: A critique of the crosscountry U-hypothesis'. Journal of Development Economics,13(3):367-382.
36. Shahbaz, M. (2010). "Income inequality‐economic growth and non‐linearity: a case of Pakistan". International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 37 No. 8, pp. 613-636.
37. Shin, Inyong, (2012). "Income inequality and economic growth". Economic Modelling, vol. 29(5), pages 2049-2057.
38. Stiglitz J (2013). The price of inequality. Penguin books, London Stock.
39. Topuz, S.G. (2022). The Relationship Between Income Inequality and Economic Growth: Are Transmission Channels Effective?. Social Indicators Research 162, 1177–1231.
40. Voitchovsky, S. (2005). Does the Profile of Income Inequality Matter for Economic Growth?. J Econ Growth 10, 273–296.
41. Wan et al. (2006). The Inequality–Growth Nexus in the Short and Long Runs Empirical Evidence from China. UNU World Institute for Development Economics Research, Research Paper No. 2006/92. |