×

zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Status, affluence, and inequality: rank-based comparisons in games of status. (English) Zbl 1188.91110
Summary: We examine the effects of changes in the income distribution in an economy where agents’ utility depends both on consumption and on their rank in the distribution of conspicuous consumption. We introduce a new methodology to compare the behavior of agents that occupy the same rank in the two different income distributions but typically have different levels of incomes. Here, an increase in incomes of the least endowed improves their welfare, yet it also increases social competition, making those in the middle to be worse off-even if they have higher incomes as well. As social competition can be lowered by spreading agents apart in income space, we find that an increase in incomes for all, augmented by (weakly) increased income dispersion, constitutes a sufficient condition for Pareto-improvement. We also show that one can have an increase both in income and relative position but still be worse off.

MSC:
91B54 Special types of economic markets (including Cournot, Bertrand)
91B62 Economic growth models
PDF BibTeX XML Cite
Full Text: DOI
References:
[1] Alesina, A.; di Tella, R.; MacCulloch, R., Happiness and inequality: are europeans and americans different?, J. public econ., 88, 2009-2042, (2004)
[2] Brown, G.D.A.; Gardner, J.; Oswald, A.; Qian, J., Does wage rank affect employees’ wellbeing?, Ind. relat., 47, 3, 355-389, (2008)
[3] Clark, A.E., 2003. Inequality-aversion and income mobility: A direct test. Mimeo. DELTA, Paris
[4] Clark, A.E.; Oswald, A.J., Comparison-concave utility and following behavior in social and economic settings, J. public econ., 70, 133-155, (1998)
[5] Clark, A.E.; Frijters, P.; Shields, M.A., Relative income, happiness and utility: an explanation for the easterlin paradox and other puzzles, J. econ. lit., 46, 1, 95-144, (2008)
[6] Clark, A.E., Masclet, D., Villeval, M.-C., forthcoming. Effort and comparison income. Ind. Lab. Relat. Rev
[7] Cole, H.L.; Mailath, G.J.; Postlewaite, A., Social norms, savings behavior, and growth, J. polit. economy, 100, 1092-1125, (1992)
[8] Cooper, B.; García-Peñalosa, C.; Funk, P., Status effects and negative utility growth, Econ. J., 111, 642-665, (2001)
[9] Corneo, G., The efficient side of progressive income taxation, Europ. econ. rev., 46, 1359-1368, (2002)
[10] Corneo, G.; Jeanne, O., On relative wealth effects and the optimality of growth, Econ. letters, 54, 87-92, (1997) · Zbl 0905.90026
[11] Corneo, G.; Jeanne, O., Pecuniary emulation, inequality and growth, Europ. econ. rev., 43, 1665-1678, (1999)
[12] Dhillon, A.; Herzog-Stein, A., Games of status and discriminatory contracts, Games econ. behav., 65, 105-123, (2009) · Zbl 1165.91430
[13] Dubey, P., Geanakoplos, J., 2005. Grading in games of status: Marking exams and setting wages. Mimeo
[14] Easterlin, R., Does economic growth improve the human lot?, (), 89-125
[15] Easterlin, R., Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all?, J. econ. behav. organ., 27, 35-47, (1995)
[16] Frank, R.H., The demand for unobservable and other positional goods, Amer. econ. rev., 75, 1, 101-116, (1985)
[17] Frank, R.H., Luxury fever: why money fails to satisfy in an era of excess, (1999), Free Press New York
[18] Frey, B.; Stutzer, A., What can economists learn from happiness research?, J. econ. lit., 40, 402-435, (2002)
[19] Friedman, D.; Ostrov, D.N., Conspicuous consumption dynamics, Games econ. behav., 64, 121-145, (2008) · Zbl 1153.91626
[20] Hopkins, E., Inequality, happiness and relative concerns: what actually is their relationship?, J. econ. inequality, 6, 351-372, (2008)
[21] Hopkins, E.; Kornienko, T., Running to keep in the same place: consumer choice as a game of status, Amer. econ. rev., 94, 1085-1107, (2004)
[22] Hopkins, E., Kornienko, T., 2008. Which inequality? The inequality of endowments versus the inequality of rewards. Mimeo
[23] Hoppe, H.; Moldovanu, B.; Sela, A., The theory of assortative matching based on costly signals, Rev. econ. stud., 76, 1, 253-281, (2009) · Zbl 1153.91690
[24] Luttmer, E.F.P., Neighbors as negatives: relative earnings and well-being, Quart. J. econ., 120, 3, 963-1002, (2005)
[25] Maskin, E.; Riley, J., Uniqueness of equilibrium in sealed high-bid auctions, Games econ. behav., 45, 395-409, (2003) · Zbl 1133.91388
[26] Moldovanu, B.; Sela, A.; Shi, X., Contests for status, J. polit. economy, 115, 338-363, (2007)
[27] Robson, A., Status, the distribution of wealth, private and social attitudes to risk, Econometrica, 60, 4, 837-857, (1992) · Zbl 0761.90011
[28] Schor, J.B., The overworked American: the unexpected decline of leisure, (1991), Basic Books New York
[29] Schor, J.B., The overspent American: why we want what we don’t need, (1998), Basic Books New York
[30] Senik, C., When information dominates comparison: learning from Russian subjective panel data, J. public econ., 88, 2099-2123, (2004)
[31] Shaked, M., Dispersive ordering of distributions, J. appl. probability, 19, 310-320, (1982) · Zbl 0481.60022
[32] Shaked, M.; Shanthikumar, J.G., Stochastic orders and their applications, (1994), Academic Press · Zbl 0806.62009
[33] Wilkinson, R.G.; Pickett, K.E., Income inequality and population health: A review and explanation of the evidence, Soc. sci. medicine, 62, 1768-1784, (2006)
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.