4.5 Article

A quantitative method for benchmarking fair income distribution

Journal

HELIYON
Volume 8, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10511

Keywords

Fairness; Income distribution; Inequality; Gini index; Sustainable Development Goals

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study introduces a method for benchmarking fair income distribution based on the concepts of procedural justice, distributive justice, and authority's power in professional sports. It demonstrates how the benchmark can be used to quantitatively gauge fair income shares for a particular value of the Gini index.
Concern about income inequality has become prominent in public discourse around the world. However, studies in behavioral economics and psychology have consistently shown that people prefer not equal but fair income distributions. Thus, finding a benchmark that could be used to measure fair income distribution across countries is a theoretical and practical challenge. Here a method for benchmarking fair income distribution is introduced. The benchmark is constructed based on the concepts of procedural justice, distributive justice, and authority's power in professional sports since it is not only widely agreed as an international norm that the allocations of athlete's salary are outcomes of fair rules, individual and/or team performance, and luck but also in line with no-envy principle of fair allocation. Using the World Bank data, this study demonstrates how the benchmark could be used to quantitatively gauge whether, for a particular value of the Gini index, the income shares by quintile of a country are the fair shares or not, and if not, what fair income shares by quintile of that country should be. Knowing this could be useful for those involved in setting targets for the Gini index and the fair income shares that are appropriate for the context of each individual country before formulating policies towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goal 10 and other related SDGs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available