| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.14 MB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Abstract(s)
Este trabalho teve como objectivo analisar a literatura relevante que
explica a relação entre a adoção de medidas de austeridade e a variação na
igualdade/desigualdade da distribuição de rendimento.
O meu principal objectivo passou por perceber e interpretar a literatura
existente que relaciona as crises económicas e financeiras e as medidas de
austeridade com a equidade na distribuição de rendimento. A metodologia
que será usada na dissertação será a interpretação da teoria existente na
literatura científica numa tentativa de sistematizar as conclusões já
encontradas pelos autores mais relevantes acerca do tema em análise. A
qualidade de uma revisão de literatura depende do seu rigor e consistência,
clareza e brevidade e de uma análise eficiente e sintetizada1.
Procurei então perceber se, de acordo com os principais autores, existe
alguma tendência na variação da desigualdade de distribuição de rendimento
aquando da adoção de medidas de austeridade.
Ao longo da revisão, tive de ir tendo em conta alguns aspectos como, quais as
medidas mais utilizadas, quais as principais fontes de informação, bem como
realçar as diferenças entre países, culturas, período temporal e o cenário
envolvente. Ao longo dos textos analisados tornou-se claro que o coeficiente
mais utilizado para aferir a desigualdade na distribuição do rendimento foi o
coeficiente de Gini.
Assim, importa realçar as principais conclusões retiradas após esta análise:
Em primeiro lugar, é importante frisar que os diversos autores estudados
retiram conclusões que podem parecer incoerentes, mas que estão
condicionadas pelas diferentes conjunturas e pela realidade de cada um dos
países, bem como pelos rácios utilizados aquando da realização das análises.
Aliás há diversos autores, que concluem precisamente que o impacto de uma
grande crise económica na distribuição de rendimento não é de forma alguma previsível e podem variar consoante a dimensão, cultura, estrutura fiscal e
económica dos diferentes países em análise.
As medidas mais referidas pelos autores dizem respeito a: aumentos
nos impostos sobre rendimento; aumento das contribuições para a segurança
social; diminuição dos benefícios sociais e diminuição dos gastos públicos.
Estas medidas têm um impacto claro no bem-estar dos indivíduos; contudo
este impacto pode ser controlado, através da adopção de medidas pensadas
para o efeito.
É também feita referência à globalização e aos avanços tecnológicos
como causadores da desigualdade entre os indivíduos.
Por vezes foi também feita referência ao aumento dos impostos
indirectos como medida adoptada em alguns países para fazer face à situação
económica que enfrentam, no entanto, por falta de informação pouco é dito
sobre o impacto desta medida.
This paper attempts to analyze the existing relevant literature which explains the relationship between the adoption of austerity measures and changes in equality/inequality of income distribution. Thus, through a literature review I’ve considered studies of several authors in order to be able to remove the most reliable conclusions. My main goal was to perceive and interpret literature that relates the economic and financial crises and austerity measures with the equitable income distribution. The methodology used in this paper is the interpretation of existing theory in the scientific literature and attempt to systematize the more relevant conclusions which were already drawn by the authors on the subject under analysis. The quality of a literature review depends on its accuracy and consistency, clarity and brevity and on an efficient synthesized analysis. I have sought to understand if, according to the main authors, there is a trend in the variation of inequality of income distribution when austerity measures are adopted. Throughout the review, I had to take into account aspects such as, what are the most commonly used measures, sources of information, as well as highlight the differences between countries, cultures, time frame and involving context. Throughout the review it became clear that the most utilized coefficient to measure inequality of income distribution is the Gini coefficient. Thus, the main conclusions drawn in this analysis should be highlighted: Firstly, it is important to note that several of the studied authors draw incoherent conclusions, because they are conditioned by different conjunctures and by the reality of each country, as well as by the coefficients used when conducting such analysis. According to some authors, it was also possible to conclude that the impact on inequality of income distribution of a large scale economic crisis is not predictable and its impacts may vary depending on the dimension, culture, tax and economic structure of the different countries under analysis. The measures most frequently mentioned by the authors concern increases in income taxes; increases in social security contributions; reduction of social benefits and public spending. These measures have a clear impact on the welfare of the individuals; however this impact may be controlled through the adoption of measures thought for that purpose. Some authors refer globalization and technological advancement as the major cause for inequality between individuals. Finally, the authors also stressed that inequality in income distribution caused by the adoption of austerity measures may also be evaluated based on differences in access by different members of the population to basic issues of well-being: health and education.
This paper attempts to analyze the existing relevant literature which explains the relationship between the adoption of austerity measures and changes in equality/inequality of income distribution. Thus, through a literature review I’ve considered studies of several authors in order to be able to remove the most reliable conclusions. My main goal was to perceive and interpret literature that relates the economic and financial crises and austerity measures with the equitable income distribution. The methodology used in this paper is the interpretation of existing theory in the scientific literature and attempt to systematize the more relevant conclusions which were already drawn by the authors on the subject under analysis. The quality of a literature review depends on its accuracy and consistency, clarity and brevity and on an efficient synthesized analysis. I have sought to understand if, according to the main authors, there is a trend in the variation of inequality of income distribution when austerity measures are adopted. Throughout the review, I had to take into account aspects such as, what are the most commonly used measures, sources of information, as well as highlight the differences between countries, cultures, time frame and involving context. Throughout the review it became clear that the most utilized coefficient to measure inequality of income distribution is the Gini coefficient. Thus, the main conclusions drawn in this analysis should be highlighted: Firstly, it is important to note that several of the studied authors draw incoherent conclusions, because they are conditioned by different conjunctures and by the reality of each country, as well as by the coefficients used when conducting such analysis. According to some authors, it was also possible to conclude that the impact on inequality of income distribution of a large scale economic crisis is not predictable and its impacts may vary depending on the dimension, culture, tax and economic structure of the different countries under analysis. The measures most frequently mentioned by the authors concern increases in income taxes; increases in social security contributions; reduction of social benefits and public spending. These measures have a clear impact on the welfare of the individuals; however this impact may be controlled through the adoption of measures thought for that purpose. Some authors refer globalization and technological advancement as the major cause for inequality between individuals. Finally, the authors also stressed that inequality in income distribution caused by the adoption of austerity measures may also be evaluated based on differences in access by different members of the population to basic issues of well-being: health and education.