Inequality reduction and social transfers: Empirical evidence for 35 European countries, 2004-2018

Authors

  • Juan Ignacio Martín-Legendre Universidad de La Coruña

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7203/IREP.4.2.25797

Abstract

This paper aims to determine which categories of social expenditure are the most effective in reducing market income inequality and to quantify how much they contribute to that improvement. For this purpose, we have assembled a sample of 35 European countries for the period 2004-2018 on which we applied regression analysis techniques for panel data. Our results point to the crucial importance of spending on housing, unemployment, and old age to explain the redistributive effectiveness of social expenditure. Likewise, we detected the critical role of the economic cycle and other factors associated with each country that were not captured by the independent variables included in our model.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alesina, A. and Perotti, R. (1996). Income Distribution, Political Instability, and Investment. European Economic Review, 40(6), 1203-1228.

Alesina, A. and Rodrik, D. (1994). Distributive Politics and Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(2), 465-490.

Anderson, E., d'Orey, M. A. J., Duvendack, M. and Esposito, L. (2018). Does Government Spending Affect Income Poverty? A Meta-Regression Analysis. World Development, 103, 60-71.

Björklund, A., and Palme, M. (2000). The evolution of income inequality during the rise of the Swedish welfare state 1951 to 1973. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance No 450.

Caminada, K. and Goudswaard, K. (2009). Social Expenditure and Poverty Reduction in the EU-15 and Other OECD countries. Department of Economics Research Memorandum.

Caminada, K., and Goudswaard, K. (2010). How Well is Social Expenditure Targeted to the Poor? In P. Saunders and R. Sainsbury (eds.) Social Security, Poverty and Social Exclusion in Rich and Poorer Countries. International Studies On Social Security, 16, 97-112.

Caminada, K., Goudswaard, K. and Koster, F. (2012). Social Income Transfers and Poverty: A Cross‐Country Analysis for OECD Countries. International Journal of Social Welfare, 21(2), 115-126.

Esping-Andersen, G. (1990), The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ.: Princeton University Press.
Förster, M. F. and Mira D'Ercole, M. (2005). Income Distribution and Poverty in OECD Countries in the Second Half of the 1990s. OECD, Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 22.

Gilens, M. and Page, B. I. (2014). Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens. Perspectives on Politics, 12(3), 564-581.

Guillaud, E., Olckers, M. and Zemmour, M. (2020). Four Levers of Redistribution: The Impact of Tax and Transfer Systems on Inequality Reduction. Review of Income and Wealth, 66(2), 444-466.

Heady, C., Mitrakos, T. and Tsakloglou, P. (2001). The distributional impact of social transfers in the European Union: evidence from the ECHP. Fiscal Studies, 22(4), 547-565

Joumard, I., Pisu, M., and Bloch, D. (2013). Tackling income inequality: The role of taxes and transfers. OECD Journal: Economic Studies, 2012(1), 37-70.

Kim, H. (2000). Anti‐Poverty Effectiveness of Taxes and Income Transfers in Welfare States. International Social Security Review, 53(4), 105-129.

Knowles, S. (2005). Inequality and Economic Growth: The Empirical Relationship Reconsidered in the Light of Comparable Data. The Journal of Development Studies, 41(1), 135-159.

Leibfried, S. (1993). Towards a European Welfare State? On integrating poverty regimes in the European Community. In C. Jones (ed.) New Perspectives on the Welfare State (pp. 133–156). Oxford: Blackwell.

Leventi, C., Sutherland, H. and Tasseva, I. V. (2019). Improving Poverty Reduction in Europe: What Works Best Where? Journal of European Social Policy, 29(1), 29-43.

Lindsey, B. and Teles, S. M. (2017). The Captured Economy: How the Powerful Enrich Themselves, Slow Down Growth, and Increase Inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lustig, N., Pessino, C. and Scott, J. (2014). The Impact of Taxes and Social Spending on Inequality and Poverty in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, and Uruguay: Introduction to the Special Issue. Public Finance Review, 42(3), 287-303.

Miežienė, R. and Krutulienė, S. (2019). The Impact of Social Transfers on Poverty Reduction in EU Countries. Baltic Journal of European Studies, 9(1), 157-175.

Notten, G. and Guio, A-C. (2019). The Impact of Social Transfers on Income Poverty and Material Deprivation. In Decent Incomes for All. Improving Policies in Europe by B. Cantillon, T. Goedemé and J. Hills, Eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 85-107.

OECD (2009). Growing Unequal?: Income Distribution and Poverty in OECD Countries. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (2012). Divided We Stand: Why Inequality Keeps Rising. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (2013). Crisis Squeezes Income and Puts Pressure on Inequality and Poverty: Results from the OECD Income Distribution Database. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (2014a). Focus on Top Incomes and Taxation in OECD Countries: Was the Crisis a Game Changer? Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (2014b). Rising Inequality: Youth and Poor Fall Further Behind. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (2014c). Trends in Income Inequality and its Impact on Economic Growth. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Persson, T. and Tabellini, G. (1994). Is Inequality Harmful for Growth? American Economic Review, 84(3), 600-621.

Wang, C., Caminada, K. and Goudswaard, K. (2012). The redistributive effect of social transfer programmes and taxes: A decomposition across countries. International Social Security Review, 65(3), 27-48.

Wolff, E. N. and Zacharias, A. (2007). The Distributional Consequences of Government Spending and Taxation in the US, 1989 and 2000. Review of Income and Wealth, 53(4), 692-715.

Downloads

Published

2022-12-29

How to Cite

Martín-Legendre, J. I. (2022). Inequality reduction and social transfers: Empirical evidence for 35 European countries, 2004-2018. International Review of Economic Policy-Revista Internacional De Política Económica, 4(2), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.7203/IREP.4.2.25797
Metrics
Views/Downloads
  • Abstract
    386
  • PDF (Español)
    296

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 2 (2022)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright is the right exercised by the creator over his/her literary and artistic work. The owner of the copyright is, as a rule, the person who creates the work, which is to say the author. In Copyright Law, the author is considered to be “the natural person who creates a literary, artistic or scientific piece of work”.  Although in principle it is only natural or physical persons who may be considered to be authors, the law foresaw certain cases in which legal persons could also benefit from these rights.

Authorship is irrevocable; it may not be transmitted either inter vivos or in the form of a testamentary trust; it does not disappear with the passage of time nor is it public domain; it is not subject to the statute of limitations.

Copyright Law has a dual nature; it covers moral rights (paternity, integrity, dissemination…), and property rights (reproduction, distribution, public communication, transformation):

Moral rights (article 14 of the Spanish Copyright Law). These refer to acknowledgement of authorship. They are irrevocable and inalienable and correspond to the right to:

  •   Decide whether his/her work is to be disseminated and how.
  •   Acknowledge authorship of the work.
  •   Demand respect for the integrity of the work.
  •   Modify the work while being respectful of the rights acquired.
  •   Withdraw the work from sale, without prejudice to compensation for damages to the owners of the right of use.
  •   Access the single,unique copy of the work that is held by a third party

Property rights (articles 18 to 25 of the Spanish Copyright Law). They refer to the four types of right of use. They allow the owner of the work to obtain financial compensation for the third-party use of his/her work:

  • Reproduction: obtaining of copies of all or part of the work.
  • Distribution: the public availability of the work through its sale, rental, loan or by any other means.
  • Public Communication: action through which a group of people may have access to the work.
  • Transformation: the translation, adaptation and any other modification of the work, leading, or not, to new work derived from it.

Metrics