All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Economic Inequality in the ‘Democratic’ Nepal: Dimensions and Implications
Unformatted Document Text:  21 estimates are not exclusively driven by urban/rural distinctions. (Insert Table 9 here) Within group inequality also varied across ecological regions. Gini coefficients reported in Table 10 suggest the Hills had considerably higher inequality than the Terai and especially Mountains. The Hills belt registers the inequality of unadjusted income much higher than those of expenditures and adjusted income. While this did not change by 2004, the Mountains also achieved a new status meeting this very condition. Interestingly, the inequality of unadjusted income considerably increased across all belts and yet the inequality of expenditures and adjusted income increased only slightly. Consistent with the national trend, the inequality of wealth, which was much higher than those of other economic resources, declined across all belts. This is interesting to observe, however, that the difference between the inequality of wealth and those of other resources and especially unadjusted income remained relatively larger in the Terai, a scenario perhaps symptomatic of the fact that expenditures are tied up with wealth and not necessarily with earned income. (Insert Table 10 here) VI Discussions and Implications The actual degree of inequality depends on the specific approaches as well as economic resources used to ascertain it, with the distribution of unadjusted income and especially wealth yielding larger inequality estimates. The common theme across different approaches and resources has been that inequality was relatively high in Nepal in the mid-1990s, which further escalated during the ensuing eight years. Previous studies have indicated that a high degree of inequality has not been a historical phenomenon in Nepal. While the estimates presented here are specific to the two survey years, large discrepancies between the 1996 estimates and any

Authors: Wagle, Udaya.
first   previous   Page 21 of 45   next   last



background image
21
estimates are not exclusively driven by urban/rural distinctions.
(Insert Table 9 here)
Within group inequality also varied across ecological regions. Gini coefficients reported in
Table 10 suggest the Hills had considerably higher inequality than the Terai and especially
Mountains. The Hills belt registers the inequality of unadjusted income much higher than those
of expenditures and adjusted income. While this did not change by 2004, the Mountains also
achieved a new status meeting this very condition. Interestingly, the inequality of unadjusted
income considerably increased across all belts and yet the inequality of expenditures and
adjusted income increased only slightly. Consistent with the national trend, the inequality of
wealth, which was much higher than those of other economic resources, declined across all belts.
This is interesting to observe, however, that the difference between the inequality of wealth and
those of other resources and especially unadjusted income remained relatively larger in the Terai,
a scenario perhaps symptomatic of the fact that expenditures are tied up with wealth and not
necessarily with earned income.
(Insert Table 10 here)
VI Discussions and Implications
The actual degree of inequality depends on the specific approaches as well as economic
resources used to ascertain it, with the distribution of unadjusted income and especially wealth
yielding larger inequality estimates. The common theme across different approaches and
resources has been that inequality was relatively high in Nepal in the mid-1990s, which further
escalated during the ensuing eight years. Previous studies have indicated that a high degree of
inequality has not been a historical phenomenon in Nepal. While the estimates presented here are
specific to the two survey years, large discrepancies between the 1996 estimates and any


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 21 of 45   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.