New IZA DPs -- Distribution and Inequality
0 views
Skip to first unread message
IZA Publications
Sep 5, 2025, 1:39:54 PMSep 5
to it...@umich.edu
Dear Italo Gutierrez,
These new IZA Discussion Papers are now available online.
DP 18032 - Barone/Loviglio/Tommasi:
Reducing the Digital Divide for Marginalized Households
DP 18043 - Baute/Bellani/Hecht:
Deservingness of the Rich, Wealth Taxation, and the Paradox of Inheritance
DP 18045 - Stark/Kosiorowski:
A Demarcation of the Gini Coefficient
DP 18057 - Strehl-Pessina/Bergolo/Leites:
Beyond Income: Understanding Preferences for Redistribution Among the Top 1%
DP 18066 - Bellani/Bledow:
Top vs. Bottom: Experimental Evidence on Priming, Information, and Redistribution Preferences
Please find the abstracts and download links below.
You might also be interested in this World of Labor content:
Income inequality and social origins
IZA DP No. 18032
Guglielmo Barone, Annalisa Loviglio, Denni Tommasi:
Reducing the Digital Divide for Marginalized Households
Abstract:
Digital skills are increasingly essential for full participation in modern life. Yet many low-income families face a dual digital divide: limited access to technology and limited ability to use it effectively. These gaps can undermine adults' ability to support their children's education, restrict access to public services, and reduce their own employability. Despite growing policy attention, rigorous evidence on how to close these gaps—especially among disadvantaged adults in high-income countries—remains scarce. We evaluate the impact of a comprehensive digital inclusion program in Turin, Italy, targeting 859 low-income families with school-aged children. Participants were randomly assigned to a control group or one of two treatment arms, each combining a free tablet with internet access and digital literacy training of different durations. One year later, treated participants reported large improvements in daily technology use and digital skills, as measured by the "Digital Skills Indicator 2.0" (DSI) developed by Eurostat. Parents also became more confident in guiding their children's online activities, more engaged in digital parenting, and more likely to access public services digitally. We find no effects on employment or job search behavior, but treated participants expressed greater optimism about future training prospects. The effects are statistically similar across the two training intensities, suggesting that (i) once basic barriers are removed, digital engagement can become self-sustaining, and/or (ii) that the returns to digital training are strongly diminishing. Mediation analysis confirms that digital skills — not just access — are key drivers of broader behavioral and economic outcomes. Sequential effects are particularly strong in the domains of social inclusion and parenting. The findings under score the importance of addressing both financial and learning constraints and suggest that bundled interventions can foster inclusive digital participation.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18032.pdf
IZA DP No. 18043
Sharon Baute, Luna Bellani, Katharina Hecht:
Deservingness of the Rich, Wealth Taxation, and the Paradox of Inheritance
Abstract:
Wealth is increasingly unequally distributed in many countries. This study examines public perceptions of wealth deservingness and preferences for taxing the wealth of the rich, focusing on how opinions vary based on the amount, use, and origin of wealth. Drawing on an original vignette experiment conducted in Germany (n=6,018), our results show a consistent pattern: as wealth increases, its perceived deservingness declines, while support for taxation rises. Similarly, spending on luxury items is seen as less deserving than philanthropic or nonprofit investments, leading to greater support for taxing the wealth of luxury spending rich people. However, wealth obtained through inheritance presents a puzzling exception: although it is perceived as the least deserving compared to wealth gained through entrepreneurship or management, this does not translate into a stronger preference for taxing inheritors over managers. These findings, which hold across different income and wealth groups as well as political affiliations, highlight the complex and sometimes contradictory public attitudes toward the rich and the taxation of their wealth.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18043.pdf
IZA DP No. 18045
Oded Stark, Grzegorz Kosiorowski:
A Demarcation of the Gini Coefficient
Abstract:
We specify the domain in the income distribution that includes the people to whom income transfers will not increase inequality in that income distribution. Inspired by Sen’s (1973, 1997) characterization of the Gini coefficient as a ratio between a measure of aggregate income-based “depression” (stress) and aggregate income, we inquire as to whether in the wake of an increase of an income or of incomes in a given income distribution, the Gini coefficient does not increase. To this end, we identify the corresponding “safe” domain and show that the pivotal value that demarcates this domain can be elicited from a simple linear function of the Gini coefficient itself. Our rule of demarcation provides for policy interventions that seek to increase a particular income or particular incomes while not exacerbating inequality in the income distribution as measured by the Gini coefficient.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18045.pdf
IZA DP No. 18057
Matías Strehl-Pessina, Marcelo Bergolo, Martin Leites:
Beyond Income: Understanding Preferences for Redistribution Among the Top 1%
Abstract:
Do top-income individuals support different levels of redistribution compared to the rest of society? If so, what drives these differences? We address these questions using a novel dataset that combines administrative tax records with unique survey data on the social and economic preferences of workers in Uruguay. We document a marked decline in support for redistribution among the Top 1% of the income distribution. Comparing this group with the Top 50-2%, we show that differences in support for redistribution are not solely explained by current income or demographics. A set of beliefs, perceptions, and views, including political ideology, meritocratic beliefs, and views on government, account for much of the observed differences. Instead, a set of behavioral traits and social preferences, such as altruism and risk aversion, measured through incentivized online games, contribute little to explaining the gap. Finally, the differences in support for redistribution persist even when comparing the Top 1% with otherhigh-incomegroups. Together, these findings suggest that the Top 1% is a distinct group with preferences for redistribution that differ from the rest of society, even from other high-income groups.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18057.pdf
IZA DP No. 18066
Luna Bellani, Nona Bledow:
Top vs. Bottom: Experimental Evidence on Priming, Information, and Redistribution Preferences
Abstract:
This paper examines how priming and information about inequality affect support for redistribution. Using a large-scale randomized survey experiment in Germany, we vary both the focus (top vs. bottom of the income distribution) and the delivery (subtle priming vs. factual information) of inequality cues. We document three key findings. First, simply directing respondents' attention to different ends of the distribution shifts redistributive preferences—especially when focusing on the rich. Second, information about top incomes has a larger effect than equivalent information about the poor, revealing asymmetric responses. Third, while both priming and information temporarily influence attitudes, these effects fade within one year. Our findings help reconcile mixed results in the literature and underscore the importance of framing, informational content, and message durability in shaping redistribution preferences.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18066.pdf
Please click here to change your subscription status.
If you have trouble downloading the papers, or for any other questions regarding the IZA Discussion Paper Series, contact public...@iza.org.
These new IZA Discussion Papers are now available online.
DP 18032 - Barone/Loviglio/Tommasi:
Reducing the Digital Divide for Marginalized Households
DP 18043 - Baute/Bellani/Hecht:
Deservingness of the Rich, Wealth Taxation, and the Paradox of Inheritance
DP 18045 - Stark/Kosiorowski:
A Demarcation of the Gini Coefficient
DP 18057 - Strehl-Pessina/Bergolo/Leites:
Beyond Income: Understanding Preferences for Redistribution Among the Top 1%
DP 18066 - Bellani/Bledow:
Top vs. Bottom: Experimental Evidence on Priming, Information, and Redistribution Preferences
Please find the abstracts and download links below.
You might also be interested in this World of Labor content:
Income inequality and social origins
IZA DP No. 18032
Guglielmo Barone, Annalisa Loviglio, Denni Tommasi:
Reducing the Digital Divide for Marginalized Households
Abstract:
Digital skills are increasingly essential for full participation in modern life. Yet many low-income families face a dual digital divide: limited access to technology and limited ability to use it effectively. These gaps can undermine adults' ability to support their children's education, restrict access to public services, and reduce their own employability. Despite growing policy attention, rigorous evidence on how to close these gaps—especially among disadvantaged adults in high-income countries—remains scarce. We evaluate the impact of a comprehensive digital inclusion program in Turin, Italy, targeting 859 low-income families with school-aged children. Participants were randomly assigned to a control group or one of two treatment arms, each combining a free tablet with internet access and digital literacy training of different durations. One year later, treated participants reported large improvements in daily technology use and digital skills, as measured by the "Digital Skills Indicator 2.0" (DSI) developed by Eurostat. Parents also became more confident in guiding their children's online activities, more engaged in digital parenting, and more likely to access public services digitally. We find no effects on employment or job search behavior, but treated participants expressed greater optimism about future training prospects. The effects are statistically similar across the two training intensities, suggesting that (i) once basic barriers are removed, digital engagement can become self-sustaining, and/or (ii) that the returns to digital training are strongly diminishing. Mediation analysis confirms that digital skills — not just access — are key drivers of broader behavioral and economic outcomes. Sequential effects are particularly strong in the domains of social inclusion and parenting. The findings under score the importance of addressing both financial and learning constraints and suggest that bundled interventions can foster inclusive digital participation.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18032.pdf
IZA DP No. 18043
Sharon Baute, Luna Bellani, Katharina Hecht:
Deservingness of the Rich, Wealth Taxation, and the Paradox of Inheritance
Abstract:
Wealth is increasingly unequally distributed in many countries. This study examines public perceptions of wealth deservingness and preferences for taxing the wealth of the rich, focusing on how opinions vary based on the amount, use, and origin of wealth. Drawing on an original vignette experiment conducted in Germany (n=6,018), our results show a consistent pattern: as wealth increases, its perceived deservingness declines, while support for taxation rises. Similarly, spending on luxury items is seen as less deserving than philanthropic or nonprofit investments, leading to greater support for taxing the wealth of luxury spending rich people. However, wealth obtained through inheritance presents a puzzling exception: although it is perceived as the least deserving compared to wealth gained through entrepreneurship or management, this does not translate into a stronger preference for taxing inheritors over managers. These findings, which hold across different income and wealth groups as well as political affiliations, highlight the complex and sometimes contradictory public attitudes toward the rich and the taxation of their wealth.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18043.pdf
IZA DP No. 18045
Oded Stark, Grzegorz Kosiorowski:
A Demarcation of the Gini Coefficient
Abstract:
We specify the domain in the income distribution that includes the people to whom income transfers will not increase inequality in that income distribution. Inspired by Sen’s (1973, 1997) characterization of the Gini coefficient as a ratio between a measure of aggregate income-based “depression” (stress) and aggregate income, we inquire as to whether in the wake of an increase of an income or of incomes in a given income distribution, the Gini coefficient does not increase. To this end, we identify the corresponding “safe” domain and show that the pivotal value that demarcates this domain can be elicited from a simple linear function of the Gini coefficient itself. Our rule of demarcation provides for policy interventions that seek to increase a particular income or particular incomes while not exacerbating inequality in the income distribution as measured by the Gini coefficient.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18045.pdf
IZA DP No. 18057
Matías Strehl-Pessina, Marcelo Bergolo, Martin Leites:
Beyond Income: Understanding Preferences for Redistribution Among the Top 1%
Abstract:
Do top-income individuals support different levels of redistribution compared to the rest of society? If so, what drives these differences? We address these questions using a novel dataset that combines administrative tax records with unique survey data on the social and economic preferences of workers in Uruguay. We document a marked decline in support for redistribution among the Top 1% of the income distribution. Comparing this group with the Top 50-2%, we show that differences in support for redistribution are not solely explained by current income or demographics. A set of beliefs, perceptions, and views, including political ideology, meritocratic beliefs, and views on government, account for much of the observed differences. Instead, a set of behavioral traits and social preferences, such as altruism and risk aversion, measured through incentivized online games, contribute little to explaining the gap. Finally, the differences in support for redistribution persist even when comparing the Top 1% with otherhigh-incomegroups. Together, these findings suggest that the Top 1% is a distinct group with preferences for redistribution that differ from the rest of society, even from other high-income groups.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18057.pdf
IZA DP No. 18066
Luna Bellani, Nona Bledow:
Top vs. Bottom: Experimental Evidence on Priming, Information, and Redistribution Preferences
Abstract:
This paper examines how priming and information about inequality affect support for redistribution. Using a large-scale randomized survey experiment in Germany, we vary both the focus (top vs. bottom of the income distribution) and the delivery (subtle priming vs. factual information) of inequality cues. We document three key findings. First, simply directing respondents' attention to different ends of the distribution shifts redistributive preferences—especially when focusing on the rich. Second, information about top incomes has a larger effect than equivalent information about the poor, revealing asymmetric responses. Third, while both priming and information temporarily influence attitudes, these effects fade within one year. Our findings help reconcile mixed results in the literature and underscore the importance of framing, informational content, and message durability in shaping redistribution preferences.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18066.pdf
Please click here to change your subscription status.
If you have trouble downloading the papers, or for any other questions regarding the IZA Discussion Paper Series, contact public...@iza.org.
IZA Publications
Sep 5, 2025, 1:42:02 PMSep 5
to italo...@gmail.com
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages