INEQUALITY IN TURKEY BY INCOME CATEGORIES
Abstract
Income inequality has been observed across both advanced and emerging market economies
for the last thirty years. The neoliberal policies has resulted in a significant change in the distribution
of income and wealth around the world in favour of the top income receivers.
Uneven distribution of income has recently been one of the main issues for researchers and
policy makers. The reason why income inequality has been so high on the agenda is that because it
has important consequences that erode social justice and peace in society. Rising inequality might
damage economic growth, might pose a serious barrier to social development and hamper well-being,
and might cause political instability.
Income inequality can be observed and analysed from various perspectives, such as regions,
cities, gender, education, family size, occupations, factors, status, etc. A different way of analysis of
income inequality can be made by comprising and harmonising three categories of income, namely
income by occupations, income by employment status, and types of income (functional income). In this
way, a relative income index has been constituted to demonstrate the top income receivers from every
income category. It has been found that the managers from the first category, employers from the
second category, and entrepreuners, rent and interest receivers from the third category constitute the
top income receivers.
The aim of this paper is to highlight that the top income receivers from aforesaid three
income categories contribute to income inequality the most in Turkey. It has been concluded that proequal
public policies should be devised to reduce inequalities.
Keywords
References
- ACEMOGLU, D. and Robinson, J.A. (2000) Why did the West Extend the Franchise? Democracy, inequality, and growth in historical perspective. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 115: 1167-1199.
- ALBERTINI, M (2013) The relation between social class and economic inequality: A strengthening or weakening nexus? Evidence from the last three decades of inequality in Italy. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 33: 27–39.
- ALVAREDO, F et al (2013) The Top 1 Percent in International and Historical Perspective, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27(3): 3-20.
- ATKINSON, A, Piketty T and Saez E (2011) Top Incomes in the Long Run of History, Journal of Economic Literature, 49: 3–71.
- CASEY, C and Alach P (2004) Just a Temp?: Women, Temporary Employment and Lifestyle, Work Employment and Society, 18:459-464.
- CARD, D and DiNardo J (2002) Technological Change and Rising Wage Inequality: Some Problems and Puzzles, Journal of Labor Economics, 20(4): 734-735.
- CORLEY, M, Perardel, Y and Popova, K (2005) Wage inequality by gender and occupation: A cross-country analysis. ILO Employment Strategy Papers, 20: 1-26.
- DABLA-NORRIS, E (2015) Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality: A Global Perspective , IMF SDN/15/13: 21.
Details
Primary Language
Turkish
Subjects
-
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Publication Date
October 31, 2016
Submission Date
July 25, 2016
Acceptance Date
-
Published in Issue
Year 2016 Volume: 3 Number: 4