scholarly journals Distributional National Accounts in New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zahra Soleimaninajafabadi

<p><b>In this study we investigated how are national accounts distributed among income percentiles. Our series display the evolution of distribution of National Accounts (either Factor Income or National Income) using two separate data bases (IR data and HES data) so our results have shown how results are different using different database as well. Findings determine that the gap between poor and wealth has changed neither over period 2006-2015, nor in a wider period of time (2000-2018) since share of bottom50 percentiles from National Income has been between 9 and 13 percent, share of middle class has been between 34 and 39 percent, and share of top 10 percentiles hasbeen between 50 and 55 percent. share top 1 percentile from National Income has increased drastically in years 2005, 2011, and 2016 while share of percentiles 90th-99thhas dropped in those years. We should stress again that our methods and results should be viewed not as a final product, but rather as a prototype and part of an ongoing attempt to provide more and more complete and transparent inequality statistics. As better sources and methods become available, the results always can be improved accordingly.</b></p>

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zahra Soleimaninajafabadi

<p><b>In this study we investigated how are national accounts distributed among income percentiles. Our series display the evolution of distribution of National Accounts (either Factor Income or National Income) using two separate data bases (IR data and HES data) so our results have shown how results are different using different database as well. Findings determine that the gap between poor and wealth has changed neither over period 2006-2015, nor in a wider period of time (2000-2018) since share of bottom50 percentiles from National Income has been between 9 and 13 percent, share of middle class has been between 34 and 39 percent, and share of top 10 percentiles hasbeen between 50 and 55 percent. share top 1 percentile from National Income has increased drastically in years 2005, 2011, and 2016 while share of percentiles 90th-99thhas dropped in those years. We should stress again that our methods and results should be viewed not as a final product, but rather as a prototype and part of an ongoing attempt to provide more and more complete and transparent inequality statistics. As better sources and methods become available, the results always can be improved accordingly.</b></p>


2018 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 119-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lydia Assouad ◽  
Lucas Chancel ◽  
Marc Morgan

This paper presents new findings about inequality dynamics in Brazil, India, the Middle East, and South Africa from the World Inequality Database (WID.world). We combine tax data, household surveys, and national accounts in a systematic manner to produce estimates of the distribution of income, using concepts coherent with macroeconomic national accounts. We document an extreme level of inequality in these regions, with top 10 percent income shares above 50 percent of national income. These societies are characterized by a dual social structure, with an extremely rich group at the top, whose income levels are broadly comparable to their counterparts in high-income countries, and a much poorer mass of the population below top groups. We discuss the diversity of regional contexts and highlight two explanations for the levels observed: the historical legacy of social segregation and modern economic institutions and policies.


Author(s):  
Peter Howland

The key aspects and features of Martinborough, a small boutique wine village approximately one hour's drive from Wellington, the capital city of New Zealand are discussed. The entangled fundamentals of the tourists' rural and metro-rural idylls, middle-class distinction and ideal reflexive individuality are highlighthed.


1991 ◽  
Vol 135 ◽  
pp. 86-90
Author(s):  
Martin Weale

The idea of balancing the national accounts can be traced back to the start of national accounting in its modern form. Estimates of national income had been produced in the years before the Second World War, but the first attempt to cast economic data in an accounting framework was that of Meade and Stone (1941). A year later the first paper on balancing the national accounts (Stone, Champernowne and Meade, 1942) appeared. Had the least squares approach, which Peter Kenny at the CSO has worked on, been computationally feasible at the time, balanced accounts would probably be taken as a matter of course, and would not be seen as a slightly confusing adjunct to the conventional ways of presenting the data.


1991 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Hashem Pesaran

Sir Richard Stone, knighted in 1978 and Nobel Laureate in Economics in 1984, is one of the pioneering architects of national income and social accounts, and is one of the few economists of his generation to have faced the challenge of economics as a science by combining theory and measurement within a cohesive framework. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his “fundamental contributions to the development of national accounts,” but he has made equally significant contributions to the empirical analysis of consumer behavior. His work on the “Growth Project” has also been instrumental in the development of appropriate econometric methodology for the construction and the analysis of large disaggregated macroeconometric models.Throughout his long and productive career, stretching over more than half a century, Stone has been an inspiration to applied econometricians all over the world. His influence goes well beyond his written work. He has made a lasting impact on the large number of (now prominent) economists and statisticians who visited the Department of Applied Economics when he was its Director. He is a scientist, a scholar, and above all, a gentleman. He gives generously of himself and is always willing to help the cause of applied econometrics. He has been a Fellow of King's College, Cambridge since 1945 and has served as the President of the Econometric Society (in 1955) and the President of the Royal Economic Society (during 1978–1980). In the interview that follows, Richard Stone gives us a delightful account of his time as a student at Westminster School, his early introduction to economics at Cambridge University, and he shares with us his memories and thoughts on a long and productive career. The interview was conducted in Stones' magnificent private library in Cambridge, and I hope that readers enjoy reading the interview as much as I enjoyed recording it.Further details of Richard Stone's biography and research activities can be found in:Deaton, A. Stone, John Richard Nicholas. In J. Eatwell, M. Milgate and P. Newman (eds.), The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, Vol. 4, pp. 509–512. London: Macmillan, 1987.Stone, J.R.N. An autobiographical sketch. In Les Prix Nobel 1984. Stockholm: Almquist and Wicksell International, 1985.


1975 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-52
Author(s):  
S. M. Naseem

The need for a consistent series of national income and related aggregates for East and West Pakistan, which are now separate countries, has been felt for a long time. Both the availability of data and the lack of willingness to make certain assumptions about the "controversial" items of income and expenditure have stood in the way of deriving such a series. Fortunately, however, the controversial items do not form a very significant part of the total and making alternative assumptions about the distribution does not change the pattern of growth of the different aggregates. The value and need for the series in the present context arises not so much for comparing the relative performance of the two economies at different points of time, but their rate of growth in the past. In this paper, we are presenting estimates of GDP at constant factor cost for East and West Pakistan from the years 1949-50 to 1969-70. From 1959-60 to 1969-70, it is also possible to present estimates of GNP at market prices and the distribution of GNP by expenditure categories, both at current and constant prices. In the first section we describe the method for obtaining GDP at constant factor cost from 1949-50 to 1969-70. In the second section, the methodology of obtaining GNP at market prices, current and constant, for 1959-60 to 1969-70 is presented. In the next section, we discuss the methodology of deriving the different national expenditure aggregates for 1959-60 to 1969-70.


Author(s):  
Jekaterina Navickė ◽  
Romas Lazutka

In this paper we aim to cover the gap in analysis of functional distribution of National income at the macroeconomic level and personal income distribution at the microlevel. We compare the information provided in the National Accounts and in the EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) for the three Baltic states and in a wider EU context to establish the links between the economic prosperity at the macro level and income distribution at individual level. Comparative design helps identify differences in income structure and inequality within similar socio-economic conditions. As demonstrated, similar levels of per capita disposable incomes in the National Accounts in the Baltics hide higher levels of income inequality than conventionally shown in the EU-SILC. This is to a large degree due to high level of under-reporting of property income and is most acute for Lithuania.


Subject GDP rebase and its impact on policy. Significance The Central Statistical Organisation's (CSO) new estimates of national income using the April 2011-March 2012 fiscal as the base year suggest that GDP in 2013-14 grew at 6.9%. This compares with growth of 5.0% computed on the basis of the earlier National Accounts series with 2004-05 as base. Further, on the new estimates, GDP growth rose from 5.1% to 6.9% between 2012-13 and 2013-14, compared with 4.8% to 5.0% based on the earlier series, making 2013-14 a year of robust recovery rather than persisting slow growth. Impacts Revision of manufacturing data could help Modi's 'Make in India' campaign, provided it is infused with policy substance. The Congress's leadership vacuum will prevent the party from harnessing the political benefits of the rebase. The government's fiscal consolidation target for 2014-15 could now be easier to achieve.


2019 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 289-295
Author(s):  
Thomas Piketty ◽  
Emmanuel Saez ◽  
Gabriel Zucman

This paper develops a simplified methodology to distribute total national income across income groups that reproduces closely the sophisticated methodology of Piketty, Saez, and Zucman (2018). It starts from top income share series based on fiscal income of Piketty and Saez (2003) and makes two basic assumptions on how national income components not included in fiscal income are distributed: (1) nontaxable labor income and capital income from pension funds are distributed like taxable labor income; (2) other nontaxable capital income is distributed like taxable capital income. This methodology could be applied to countries with less data.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document