Robustness of Shared Prosperity Estimates : How Different Methodological Choices Matter
This paper is the first to systematically test the robustness of shared prosperity estimates to different methodological choices using a sample of countries from all regions in the world. The tests that are conducted include grouped versus microdat...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2016
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2016/03/26089784/robustness-shared-prosperity-estimates-different-methodological-choices-matter http://hdl.handle.net/10986/24152 |
Summary: | This paper is the first to
systematically test the robustness of shared prosperity
estimates to different methodological choices using a sample
of countries from all regions in the world. The tests that
are conducted include grouped versus microdata, nominal
welfare aggregate versus adjustment for spatial price
variation, and different treatment of income with negative
and zero values. The empirical results reveal an only
minimal impact of the proposed tests on shared prosperity
estimates. Nevertheless, there are important caveats. First,
spatial adjustment can change the ranking of households,
affecting the distribution of the population in the bottom
40 percent. Second, the negligible impact of spatial
deflation holds only if price adjustments are carried out
consistently over time. Finally, the treatment of negative
and zero income numbers can potentially lead to substantial
differences in shared prosperity, depending on the magnitude
of negative income and the share of households with negative
and zero numbers across years. |
---|