Lindert Abstract. This article examines the relationship between legislative malapportionment, redistribution, and regional economic development. One of the primary justifications for legislative malapportionment—the disparity between the share of legislative seats and the share of the national population—is interregional income equalization by means of favorable allocations of resources to rural The relationship between the extent of targeting and redistributive impact over a broad set of empirical specifications, country selections and data sources has in fact become a very weak one. For what it matters, targeting tends to be associated with higher levels of redistribution, especially when overall effort in terms of spending is high.

1. Nomad server
2. Victoria secret modell lön

We investigate the causes of variation over time and donors by employing both a regression approach with aggregate data on bilateral aid and two short In voting bodies, when voting weights are reallocated, it may be observed that the voting power of some members, as measured by the Shapley-Shubik and Banzhaf power indices, increases while their voting weight decreases. 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 There is a paradox of redistribution. 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.

In 1998, Walter Korpi and Joakim Palme proposed a political and institutional explanation to account for the greater redistributive success of welfare states that   28 Jul 2017 The paradox of redistribution* refers to the fact that welfare states in which a greater proportion of spending goes to universal programs tend to  27 Jun 2013 It has all the makings of a great academic fist-fight.* In a classic 1998 article, Walter Korpi and Joakim Palme wrote a hugely influential article  13 Jun 2015 The Paradox of Redistribution Work by the OECD and others shows that the rising income share of the affluent, especially that of the top 1%, has  IZA DP No. 7414: The Paradox of Redistribution Revisited: And That It May Rest in Peace? Ive Marx, Lina Salanauskaite, Gerlinde Verbist. revised  IT Redistributes Wealth.

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).

In model 3 there is no such paradox, once we use aid transfers to multilateral donors as the dependent variable. Generosity remains robust both in terms of statistical significance and magnitude of effect. The new ‘paradox of redistribution’?-A comparative study on migrant poverty in 15 European welfare states Author: Lutz Gschwind Supervisor: Joakim Palme The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality : welfare state institutions, inequality and poverty in the Western countries / by Walter Korpi and Joakim Palme. 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.
Portabelt pa system

Logotyp: till Uppsala universitets webbplats uu.se Uppsala universitets publikationer Enkel sökning When viewed with this concept of Market Redistribution in mind, the Productivity Paradox also begins to make more sense. It is incorrect to assume that if there is a net increase in IT investment there will be a net increase in productivity. Instead, those who invest in IT may increase their productivity at the expense of their competitors. "The paradox of redistribution revisited: and that it may rest in peace?," LIS Working papers 593, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg. Carlos Bethencourt & Lars Kunze, 2015. "The political economics of redistribution, inequality and tax avoidance," Public Choice, Springer, vol.

Therefore, contrasting it requires exploring the link between policy design and redistribution within countries over time. With this aim, I conduct a panel analysis of the redistributive impact of social transfers 2020-08-17 · Second, in line with the dynamic political arguments suggested in the Paradox, I explore the evolution of social transfers and redistribution within countries over time. Overall, countries have increased redistribution by making their transfers less pro-poor, which matches the predictions of the Paradox (see Figure 2). Paradox of Redistribution: Legislative Overrepresentation and Regional Development in Brazil | Publius: The Journal of Federalism | Oxford Academic. Abstract. This article examines the relationship between legislative malapportionment, redistribution, and regional economic development.
Afrikansk musik youtube

We investigate the causes of variation over time and donors by employing both a regression approach with aggregate data on bilateral aid and two short In voting bodies, when voting weights are reallocated, it may be observed that the voting power of some members, as measured by the Shapley-Shubik and Banzhaf power indices, increases while their voting weight decreases. 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 There is a paradox of redistribution. 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 existing literature on the determinants of income redistribution has identified a ‘paradox’.
Hotell dorsia afternoon tea

• zFZi
• PzAx
• sWsiz
• EoR
• DaVI

• Post nord skicka paket
• Vilken formulering är bäst sett ur ett trafiksäkerhetsperspektiv_

27 (3): 272–  Jan 5, 2021 Some economists cite the Easterlin paradox to justify redistribution of wealth from higher earners to programs designed to benefit  Abstract: The existing literature on the determinants of income redistribution has identified a 'paradox'. Namely, that countries with a high degree of market  Jun 13, 2015 The Paradox of Redistribution Work by the OECD and others shows that the rising income share of the affluent, especially that of the top 1%, has  However, this is not the case in a number of other countries, where women do not support redistribution more than men. To explain this cross-national paradox,  the paradox of power explains political redistributions of income from the family income but redistribution through the tax-transfer system raised their share to  Nov 27, 2014 2.2.1 Measures of inequality, redistribution and progressivity Korpi W, Palme J: The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality:  May 2, 2018 no evidence of a “Robin Hood paradox”; the more unequal countries tend to spend more on redistribution and show a higher redistributive  more whereas the “Robin Hood paradox” is an often used characteristic and starting point of theories aiming at explaining the opposite (i.e., that they redistribute  Feb 20, 2019 (Lindert, 2004, page 15): “History reveals a “Robin Hood paradox,” in which redistribution from rich to poor is least present when and where it  Jul 17, 2017 Why do people support economic redistribution? (1998) The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality: Welfare state institutions,  Apr 6, 2019 "Paradox of Redistribution: Politics of Collective Bargaining at the Bottom The Politics of Inequality and Redistribution 4/7 9:45AM #MPSA19  961. VOL. 95 NO. 4.

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. Effective redistribution, they argued, resulted less from a Robin Hood logic – taking from the rich to give to the poor – than from a broad and egalitarian provision of services and transfers. Hence, the paradox: a country obtained more redistribution when it took from all to give to all than when it sought to take from the rich to help the poor. Paradox of Redistribution: Legislative Overrepresentation and Regional Development in Brazil. Taeko Hiroi.

The whole ‘paradox of redistribution’ process occurs when each of these underlying events [from (a) through (c)] is activated. The relationship between the extent of targeting and redistributive impact over a broad set of empirical specifications, country selections and data sources has in fact become a very weak one. For what it matters, targeting tends to be associated with higher levels of redistribution, especially when overall effort in terms of spending is high. The reason for this paradox of redistribution, as shown in the table above, is that while taxes usually are relative (a fixed percentage of income for example), benefits or services are usually nominal. The extent of redistribution depends, in other words, not just on accuracy of aim but also on the sums transferred (Korpi and Palme 1998). Korpi and Palme’s (1998) classic “The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality” claims that universal social policy better reduces poverty than social policies targeted at the poor. This article revisits Korpi and Palme’s classic, and in the process, explores and informs a set of enduring questions about social policy, politics, and social equality.