Search

Begin New Search Topic Inequality Political Geography Global Focus Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 5 Years Publication Year within 3 Years Publication Year within 25 Years Publication Year within 1 Year

1. The Invisible Leverage of the Top 1 Percent: Absentee Debtors and Their Hedge Funds

Author:
Stefano Sgambati
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
City Political Economy Research Centre (CITYPERC), University of London
Abstract:
The existing literature on finance, debt and inequality depicts economic elites as a creditor class. According to a popular thesis, over the past four decades, the rich and ultra-rich households in the top 1 percent have experienced a saving glut (excess income), which they have invested in the debts of the poor and their governments. While it is undeniable that the rich have expanded their income share at the expenses of the poor, to refer to them as ‘creditors’ or ‘lenders’ is a misrepresentation of how they actually expand their wealth and income shares by financial means. For it conceals the fact that a great deal of their investments is leveraged, that is, carried out with borrowed money. This article shows that the debts generated by individuals and households in the top 1 percent easily surpass those of all other households and even exceed those of the most indebted states in the world. However, these debts are hard to estimate, and indeed they are not accounted for in statistics on household debt. This is because households in the top 1 percent do not borrow from banks, like normal households do, but they are instead absentee debtors who borrow through the hedge funds, private equity firms, personal investment trusts, and big banks of which they are dominant shareholders and ultimate beneficiaries. To gain an insight into their invisible leverage, the article looks at how much hedge funds borrow, and why their leverage matters.
Topic:
Debt, Political Economy, Inequality, Finance, Elites, Hedge Funds, and Leverage
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. IMF Standby Agreements and Inequality: The Role of Informality

Author:
Ceyhun Elgin and Adem Elveren
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Political Economy Research Institute (PERI), University of Massachusetts Amherst
Abstract:
In this paper we investigate the response of two inequality metrics to different IMF programs. To this end, we use a relatively large annual (unbalanced) cross-country panel dataset that includes the Gini index and the Estimated Household Income Inequality as the two relevant inequality metrics and covers the period from 1950 to 2016 in an annual basis for 159 countries. Our empirical analysis indicates that in countries where the informal sector size (as percentage of GDP) is relatively larger, the extent of income inequality increases after different IMF programs, but particularly so after standby arrangements. However, we also show that the opposite is true, when informal sector size is small, i.e., inequality declines after different IMF programs.
Topic:
Political Economy, Inequality, IMF, and Informal Economy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. U.S. and Global Approaches to Financing Long-Term Care: Understanding the Patchwork

Author:
Celli Horstman, Evan D. Gumas, and Gretchen Jacobson
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Commonwealth Fund
Abstract:
Most United States adults age 65 and older will need long-term care toward the end of their lives.1 Long-term care, provided in the home, community, or in institutional settings like a nursing home, includes medical care as well as personal, nonmedical care for people who are unable to perform activities of daily living, like cooking or bathing. Some services also may support social needs for those unable to perform what are known as instrumental activities of daily living, such as shopping or medication management. In 2018, more than 5 million people in the United States used home health care, including adult day care or home health agency services, and nearly 4 million people resided in nursing homes or residential care communities.2 Despite the widespread need for long-term care, the U.S. has no national program to cover the costs of long-term care. While certain states have implemented their own programs, the resulting patchwork of funding has left many Americans with no sustainable way to pay for the services they require. Other developed countries have comprehensive, national long-term care financing systems featuring broad eligibility and high levels of financial support. In this brief, we analyze data from multiple sources on long-term care costs in the U.S., as well as spending data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), to better understand long-term care financing strategies in 12 high-income countries. In addition to these data, we synthesized initiatives to long-term care funding in these 12 countries. (For details, see “How We Conducted This Study.”) Since the U.S. does not have a national funding strategy, we also focused on individual state approaches. International and U.S. state approaches may provide insights to policymakers seeking to advance comprehensive long-term care funding.
Topic:
Health, Health Care Policy, Inequality, and Social Services
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Analysis on the Determinants of Labor Share and Its Policy Implications

Author:
Yaein Baek, Minsoo Han, Wongi Kim, and Hyunsuk Kim
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
There has been a significant decline in the global labor share, leading to numerous studies about the cause of this drop. The labor share is used as one of the main indicators of inequality because a decrease in the labor share can lead to aggravation of income inequality. This is because low-skilled workers can be greatly affected by such a decline in the labor share and the main source of in-come for the low-income class, including the self-employed, is labor income. Among various indicators of inequality, this study analyzes the determinants of the change in labor share. Technological changes such as adoption of robots, advancements in information and communications technology (ICT) and the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) are expected to change the labor market. Hence, this study analyzes the impact of technological changes on labor share and suggests policy responses.
Topic:
Economics, Science and Technology, Labor Issues, and Inequality
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Global Inequality in Well‐​Being Has Decreased across Many Dimensions: Introducing the Inequality of Human Progress Index

Author:
Chelsea Follett and Vincent Geloso
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
The world has seen dramatic, global human progress across a broad range of indicators in recent decades, but have those gains been widely shared? The Inequality of Human Progress Index (IHPI) measures relative gaps in global development. It surveys international inequality across a greater number of dimensions than any prior index. By analyzing inequality in a multidimensional way, the IHPI takes inequality more seriously than those indexes that focus on income inequality alone. The IHPI considers material well‐​being and seven additional metrics: lifespan, infant mortality, adequate nutrition, environmental safety, access to opportunity (as measured by education), access to information (as measured by internet access), and political freedom. Across all but two of those dimensions, the world has become more equal since 1990. Globalization and market liberalization over the past few decades have not only raised absolute living standards but also reduced overall inequality.
Topic:
Development, Inequality, Economy, and Well-Being
Political Geography:
Global Focus

6. An Age of Crises: Prospects for inequality and division

Author:
Roshni Menon
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation
Abstract:
Inequalities can shape, drive, and amplify crises and at the same time, be the consequence of crises. The double shock of the COVID-19 pandemic followed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine has been accompanied by an uptick in income and social inequalities. Moreover, a world enveloped in a series of crises has become the grim backdrop for many of the current discourses on how to solve salient world problems. The complexity and force of how each individual crisis overlaps and interacts with, and sometimes worsens the impact of other crises—including rising levels of inequality and exclusion—is profound and damaging, requiring careful analysis of both consequences and solutions. For instance, surging inflation rates, which began in 2021, as well as the food and energy crises set off largely by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, have precipitated and worsened the debt crisis in many lower income countries. Combined with the existential threat of climate change and related and prevalent extreme climate events, a perfect and potent storm of events have been set in motion: even if aspects of today’s cost-of-living crisis wane, their ripple effects will continue to reverberate, in some instances setting off political instability and social unrest in parts of the world. The lessons learned from these crises, and their interaction with inequality and exclusion will be critical to better prepare for the future, and to break the deadly spiral of crises and rising inequality. While disasters—both those created by people and generated by nature—have increasingly become a daily reality for many in different parts of the world, policies at the global, regional, and national levels, have yet to catch up with this new reality. Looking across six areas—food and fuel shortages, inflation, debt distress, extreme climate-related events, and political unrest—there are very few countries that escape the reach of at least one crisis. However, more alarmingly, many countries are exposed to multiple and compounding levels of economic, social, and environmental shock; which can intersect with underlying inequalities and vulnerabilities such that a vicious cycle of income inequality, increasing social stratification, and discontent spreads across societies and generations. New research from the Pathfinders team shows that in those countries for which complete data exists across six crises (90 in total), eight countries are at risk for being impacted by all crises at the same time. 72 out of these 90 countries (or 80 percent) are at high or moderate risk of suffering from at least three crises at the same time. If we limit the analysis to five crises (food price shock, inflation, extreme climate events, debt distress, and protests), 10 out of the 134 countries with complete data are at high or moderate risk of suffering from all five crises and 86 countries (65 percent) from at least three crises. This number may even be an underestimate as typically lower income countries have less capacity to collect data and tend to deal with multiple crises arising from debt and cost-of-living issues. In response to these multiple crises (or polycrisis), urgent, integrated, and coordinated policy interventions are needed, including even greater cooperation and commitment at the global level. Without a sharp change of course, a renewed recommitment to multilateralism and bolder action to address root causes, there will be little change for the better. There is an opportunity for committed countries to advocate for sustained and urgent action to respond to the immediate humanitarian needs of a great majority of the world’s population. Policy solutions can be geared towards the shorter and longer terms: The first includes an urgent set of instruments aimed at reducing suffering as soon as possible and a second set focused on achieving longer-term structural transformation to reduce vulnerability and promote sustainability.
Topic:
Inequality, Crisis Management, COVID-19, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. From Rhetoric to Action: Delivering Inequality & Exclusion

Author:
Center on International Cooperation
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation
Abstract:
Inequality and exclusion are not destiny. Change is possible. Following three years of research, country visits, expert meetings, and debate, the Pathfinders’ Grand Challenge on Inequality and Exclusion has identified policy priorities for immediate and longer-term actions to tackle inequality and exclusion. The report draws on the lived experiences and desires of people across countries around the world. To understand citizens’ concerns about inequalities, their policy priorities, and their desire for change, we commissioned a public opinion survey in eight countries: Canada, Costa Rica, Mexico, Sierra Leone, South Korea, Sweden, Tunisia, and Uruguay. These opinion surveys show an immense preoccupation with societal divisions and a consensus that more needs to be done to address them. What is working to make progress on equality and inclusion? Countries and local communities that have made sustained progress towards more inclusive and equal societies have generally taken a three-pronged approach: They have delivered visible results that make a material difference in people’s daily lives, in areas such as social protection, housing and wages; they have built solidarity, through for example truth-telling exercises, police and justice reform and community empowerment; and they have secured credibility and sought to avert reversals by fighting corruption, broadening political power, and increasing the public financing needed for policy development.
Topic:
Public Opinion, Inequality, Survey, and Exclusion
Political Geography:
Canada, South Korea, Uruguay, Sierra Leone, Sweden, Mexico, Tunisia, Costa Rica, and Global Focus

8. Top Wealth and Its Historical Origins: An Analysis of Germany’s Largest Privately Held Fortunes in 2019

Author:
Daria Tisch and Emma Ischinsky
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Sciences Po Center on Coping with Instability in Market Societies (MaxPo)
Abstract:
Rising wealth inequality is both a topic in recent policy discussion and in the social sciences. Despite the general interest in wealth concentration, we know only little about the largest privately held fortunes. To help fill this gap we analyze the historical origins of Germany’s 1,032 largest fortunes in 2019. In particular, we identify the share of entrenched fortunes – fortunes which date back to the beginning of the twentieth century – and ask to what extent they differ from more recently established ones. Furthermore, we examine in an exploratory way if entrenched fortunes are connected to fortunes with more recent origins through family lines. We use a journalistic rich list published by the manager magazin in 2019, which we link with both rich lists from 1912/1914 and Wikidata. We find that about eight percent of today’s fortunes can be traced back to fortunes held by the same families in 1913. Regression analyses show that entrenched fortunes rank on average higher on the rich list than the remaining ones. Descriptive network analyses indicate that some of today’s largest fortunes are intertwined through marital lines, hinting at social closure at the top. Our findings indicate that the accumulation and perpetuation of fortunes over many generations is an important feature of top wealth in Germany.
Topic:
Inequality, Family, Elites, Wealth, Inheritance, and Network Analysis
Political Geography:
Europe and Global Focus