The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality: Welfare State Institutions, Inequality and Poverty in the Western Countries. Joakim Palme and Walter Korpi () No 174, LIS Working papers from LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg

We present new versions of the Parrondo's paradox by which a losing game can be turned into winning by including a mechanism that allows redistribution of

My paper provides a di erent view on the impact of welfare state design. The Paradox of Redistribution is an argument about political developments at country level. Therefore, contrasting it requires exploring the link between policy design and redistribution within countries over time. The existing literature on the determinants of income redistribution has identified a ‘paradox’. Namely, that countries with a high degree of market income inequality redistribute little, which is in disagreement with the median voter theorem. In a first step, this paper outlines several mechanisms that explain why government corruption might be partially responsible for this ‘paradox paradox of redistribution’ theory is translated into a system dynamics model, and simulations are analyzed.

Paradox of redistribution

much is actually available for redistribution. The reasoning is that, paradoxically, in countries with selective welfare systems less resources tend to be available for redistribution because there is less widespread and less robust political support for redistribution. As a consequence, the redistributive impact of such systems tends to be smaller.

681–682): “The more we target benefits on the poor only […], the less likely we are to reduce poverty and inequality.” social policy discipline, in which they put forward a “paradox of redistribution”: the more countries target welfare resources exclusively at the poor, the less redistribution is actually achieved and the less income inequality and poverty are reduced. The current paper provides a state-of-the-art review of empirical research into that paradox. The trade-oﬀ is similar to the paradox of redistribution of targeting vs.

Four levers of redistribution : The impact of tax and transfer systems on inequality reduction. LIS working paper series No. 695. Korpi, W., Palme, J. (1998). The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality : Welfare State Institutions, Inequality, and Poverty in the Western Countries. American Sociological Review, 63(5), 661-687.

social policy discipline, in which they put forward a “paradox of redistribution”: the more countries target welfare resources exclusively at the poor, the less redistribution is actually achieved and the less income inequality and poverty are reduced. The current paper provides a state-of-the-art review of empirical research into that paradox. 2017-07-28 · The paradox of redistribution * refers to the fact that welfare states in which a greater proportion of spending goes to universal programs tend to be more redistributive than welfare states in which a greater proportion of spending goes to targeted programs. By a simple constructive proof, this paper shows that such a "paradox of redistribution" can always occur in any voting body if the number of voters, n, is sufficiently large. Simulation results show that the paradox is quite frequent (up to 30 percent) and increases with n (at least for small n). 2015-12-01 · In model 2 we see again a paradox of redistribution between poverty-related aid and total aid. In model 3 there is no such paradox, once we use aid transfers to multilateral donors as the dependent variable.

One is whether social policies should be targeted to low- income groups or universal; another whether benefits should be equal for all or earnings-related. Traditional arguments in favor of targeting and flat-rate benefits, focusing on the distribution of the money actually transferred, have The constitutions of contemporary democracies uphold equal voting rights for citizens. Yet, this principle has in practice been breached in many countries due to disproportional allocation of legislative seats to electoral districts relative to their population size, known as malapportionment.
Socialt arbete tove phillips

Mar 5, 2018 Insistence on redistribution—by any means and of any object—is the solution to this paradox is to be less reactionary as a society and to The economic literature on redistribution documents what Lindert (2000) calls the ”Robin Hood paradox': the more unequal pre- tax/benefit incomes, the less Feb 11, 2016 The idea that government could redistribute income willy-nilly with But redistribution aims to take money from people who earned it and give Jan 31, 2018 Published: January 31, 2018 Changes in family structure make it difficult to measure economic progress for the middle class and to get an 60-Second Adventures in Economics.

2 May 2018 no evidence of a “Robin Hood paradox”; the more unequal countries tend to spend more on redistribution and show a higher redistributive policies, we resolve the existing paradox by showing that social democratic public employment, redistribution, and poverty reduction appeared to support. 29 Jun 2016 Abstract The paper provides a rational explanation for the redistribution paradox, whereby low‐income individuals seeking more social security The Paradox of redistribution by Walter Korpi and Joakim Palme (1998) posits that welfare states that have less targeted social spending redistribute more. 26 Jun 2012 Following the logic that Dworkin used when he showed the impossibility to reach an agreement on redistribution in terms of welfare, we also set 11 Nov 2015 The inequality paradox in British politics to realize that direct government action to redistribute wealth was a lot harder than “take it away from 3 Nov 2017 We are honoured to welcome one of the most prominentvoices in the current globalisation debate, Political Economist at Harvard University redistribution as the remedy for injustice and the goal of political struggle.*.
Prestakind kit price

the paradox of redistribution. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(1), 70-85. Marx, I., Salanauskaite, L., & Verbist, G. (2013). The paradox of redistribution revisited: and that it may rest in peace? Session 10, East Asia * Kyung-Sup, C. (1999) “Compressed Modernity and its Discontents: South Korean Society in

Korpi, Walter, 1934- (författare) Palme, Joakim, 1958- (författare) Publicerad: Stockholm : Univ., Institutet för social forskning, 1997 Engelska 37 s. Inequality has received renewed attention in the public as well as in the academic debate. According to one theory, the development of redistribution and inequality reflects the institutional desig We argue that social insurance institutions are of central importance for redistributive outcomes. using new data bases, our comparative analyses of the effects of different institutional types of welfare states on poverty and inequality indicate that institutional differences lead to unexpected outcomes and generate the paradox of redistribution: The more we target benefits at the poor and the more concerned we are with creating equality via equal public transfers to all, the less likely we others, the paradox of redistribution (Fischer and Schotter, 1978, Schotter, 1981), the paradox of new members (Brams, 1975, Brams and Af fuso, 1976) and the paradox of large size (Brams, 1975). Donors differ in the amount of official development assistance dedicated to poverty reduction.

The economic literature on redistribution documents what Lindert (2000) calls the ”Robin Hood paradox': the more unequal pre- tax/benefit incomes, the less

In this paper, the paradox of redistribution is translated to system dynamics and the coherence of the theory is analyzed by a system dynamics model. The system dynamics translation results in a model that reproduces the reference modes. Rethinking the paradox of redistribution 2 should do about the less well-adjusted minority, and benefits are susceptible to retrenchment on the grounds of ‘fairness’ (Rothstein, 1998: 158). For no policy area are these logics likely to apply so strongly as for the policy area of design. The Paradox of Redistribution is an argument about distributive politics.

The Paradox of Redistribution Andrew Jackson / June 13, 2015 The issue of how to deal with rising inequality and the squeezed middle-class has recently moved to the centre of political debate, with the various parties proposing significant policy changes.