Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Development
Lorenz Curve and
Gini Coefficient
1988
1993
10
0.9
0.8
20
2.3
50
9.6
8.5
75
25.9
22.3
85
41
37.1
90
53.1
49.2
95
69.8
66.3
99
91.7
91.5
100
100
100
Pop
90
80
70
60
50
ne
i
L
40
of
li
a
t
to
ra
g
e
nt
n
it o
1988
199
3
10
0.9
0.8
20
2.3
50
9.6
8.5
25.9
22.
3
41
37.
1
53.1
49.
2
69.8
66.
3
99
91.7
91.
5
100
100
100
75
85
30
90
20
95
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Wealth
(PPP)
90
80
70
60
50
ne
i
L
40
of
li
a
t
to
Pop
i
t
ra
g
e
nt
1988
199
3
10
0.9
0.8
20
2.3
50
9.6
8.5
25.9
22.
3
41
37.
1
53.1
49.
2
69.8
66.
3
99
91.7
91.
5
100
100
100
75
85
30
90
20
95
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Wealth
(PPP)
90
80
70
60
50
ne
i
L
40
of
li
a
t
to
Pop
i
t
ra
g
e
nt
1988
199
3
10
0.9
0.8
20
2.3
50
9.6
8.5
25.9
22.
3
41
37.
1
53.1
49.
2
69.8
66.
3
99
91.7
91.
5
100
100
100
75
85
30
90
20
95
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Wealth
(PPP)
Pop
90
80
70
ra
g
e
nt
60
n
it o
li
a
ot The greater
t
of
this area the
ne
i
L
more unequal
the
distribution
50
40
30
1988
199
3
10
0.9
0.8
20
2.3
50
9.6
8.5
25.9
22.
3
41
37.
1
53.1
49.
2
69.8
66.
3
99
91.7
91.
5
100
100
100
75
85
90
20
95
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Wealth
(PPP)
90
80
70
60
50
ne
i
L
40
of
li
a
t
to
ra
g
e
nt
n
it o
A / B = Gini
Values should lie
between 0 (total
integration) to 1 (total
segregation).
30
20
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Tasks
Pop
Wealth
(PPP)
1988
1993
10
0.9
0.8
20
2.3
50
9.6
8.5
75
25.9
22.3
85
41
37.1
90
53.1
49.2
95
69.8
66.3
99
91.7
91.5
100
100
100
Selected African
Gini
Argentina
Bolivia
2002
Brazil
2001
Chile 2000
Colombia
Ecuador
1998
El
Salvador
Guatemala
Honduras
Panama
Developed
Countries
Gini
Gini
0.51
Botswana
0.58
Central
African
Rep.
0.63
0.61
Australia
Malaysia
0.49
0.26
Taiwan,
China
2000
0.24
0.33
Republic
of Korea
1998
0.32
Denmark
1997
0.27
Thailand
2002
0.4
0.31
0.28
Belgium
2000
0.59
0.51
Malawi
1997/1998
0.54
South
Africa
0.58
France
1994
0.54
Uganda
1991
0.59
Germany
0.5
Zambia
1998
0.53
Ireland 2
0.31
Zimbabwe
0.57
Italy 2000
0.31
Luxembou
rg
0.29
0.58
0.52
0.5
Gini
0.32
Lesotho
1995
0.63
Selected East
Asian
Canada
2000
Norway
Selected Fast
Growing
India
China
0.33
Lowest fifth
3.5 %
3.5%
Second fifth
8.8
12.3
Third fifth
14.5
26.8
Fourth fifth
23.1
49.9
Highest fifth
40.1
100.0
Income
Quintile
Percentage Cumulative
of Total Percentage of
Family
Total Family
Income
Income
100
80
60
I
B
40
20
H
A
F
0
20
40
60
80
100
100%
80
60
40
Line of absolute
equality
1970
2001
1929
20
0
40
20
60
80 100%
Cumulative percentage of population
Welfare programs.
Unemployment insurance.
Social security.
Progressive taxation.
Improved macroeconomic performance
of the economy.
increased because:
Sweden
Japan
United States
Brazil
20
40
60
80 100
Cumulative percentage of population
What can you say about the distribution of wealth in the USA from this
Socioeconomic Dimensions
of Income Inequality
Income
Race.
Ethnicity.
Geographic region.
Gender.
Type of job.
The
Theoretical views on
Development
Rostows modernist approach all
countries can follow a path to
development
Dependency theorists and World
Systems Approach the development
of under development.