Chapter 7: Technical Notes
Notes 1. For an introduction to the concept of dominance, its relation to inequality measurement, and the related concept of stochastic dominance, see Deaton (1997). 2. For large N, the final term in equation 7.2 approaches 0, and it is often omitted. 3. Erreygers (2005) suggests a couple of alternatives to the concentration index to deal with this problem. 4. This ignores the sampling variability of the left-hand-side estimates.
References Bleichrodt, H., and E. van Doorslaer. 2006. “A Welfare Economics Foundation for Health Inequality Measurement.” Journal of Health Economics 25 (5): 945–57. Deaton, A. 1997. The Analysis of Household Surveys: A Microeconometric Approach to Development Policy. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Erreygers, G. 2005. “Beyond the Health Concentration Index: An Atkinson Alternative to the Measurement of Socioeconomic Inequality of Health.” University of Antwerp, Antwerp. ———. 2006. “Correcting the Concentration Index.” University of Antwerp, Antwerp. Gwatkin, D. 2003. “Free Government Health Services: Are They the Best Way to Reach the Poor?” World Bank, Washington, DC. http://poverty .worldbank.org/files/13999_gwatkin0303.pdf. Gwatkin, D. R., S. Rustein, K. Johnson, R. Pande, and A. Wagstaff. 2003. Initial Country-Level Information about Socio-economic Differentials in Health, Nutrition, and Population. 2 vols. Washington, DC: World Bank. Kakwani, N. C. 1977. “Measurement of Tax Progressivity: An International Comparison.” Economic Journal 87 (345): 71–80. ———. 1980. Income Inequality and Poverty: Methods of Estimation and Policy Applications. New York: Oxford University Press. Kakwani, N. C., A. Wagstaff, and E. van Doorslaer. 1997. “Socioeconomic Inequalities in Health: Measurement, Computation, and Statistical Inference.” Journal of Econometrics 77 (1): 87–104.
89