Reducing Inequality: Taking from the top to distribute at the bottom

Abstract

(ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.)- Gan Li,(1) ... (Reducing income disparity), Caijing, 6 January 2013.- Zhu Guozhong,(2) ... (The 'second distribution' struggles to deliver), Caijing, 6 January 2013.- Chen Tao,(3) ... (What will influence the future incomes of the Chinese?), Nanfangzhoumo, 3 January 2013.- Feng Lei and Qiu Yue,(4) ... (The four mistakes of the in income distribution), Guangming ribao, 28 January 2013.- Editorial, ... (Getting away from the concept of redistribution to look at the of redistribution), Diyi caijing ribao, 19 December 2012.In the words of Chen Tao, 2012 was a watershed year during which the political and public spotlight turned from concerns about GDP and growth to focus more on the redistribution of wealth. Articles by Chinese researchers, journalists, and academics have also broadly addressed the twin subjects of sustainable growth and quality of development. The question of fair income holds an important place in all of them. Discus- sion of this matter has been given a new lease of life by the publication of the first official Gini index since 2008, which, according to the National Bu- reau of Statistics (NBS), dropped from 0.49 in 2008 to 0.47 in 2012, and through the launch of a reform plan for income distribution (shouru fenpei gaige fang'an ... put before the National People's Congress in March.The writers recognise the extent of efforts carried out by the government, and note the importance, symbolically at least, of the measures announced in the redistribution plan. They all confirm that it was high time for the gov- ernment to tackle the issue of inequality, as strong growth without equi- table redistribution will be increasingly difficult to justify in the future, and potentially fraught with social risks.However, a number of criticisms have quickly appeared: Beijing's figures are said to be unrealistic, as is the proposed programme itself. What is the reality of social, economic, and territorial inequality in China? What does the action plan provide for, and if it is inadequate, what are its weak- nesses?The scope and details of income disparity in ChinaThere is little data available for measuring income disparity in China, and even when it does exist it is not always consistent. In this context, the Gini coefficient (ji'nixishu ...) is doubtless the least bad tool for com- prehending these inequalities. According to the latest official figures (from the NBS), in China, the Gini coefficient stood at 0.474(5)in 2012. Despite being high - the world average is 0.44 - this result is contradicted by several sources. Indeed, in 2010, the UN published its own calculation of the Chi- nese index and obtained a ratio of around 0.52.That same year, the Survey and Research Centre for Household Finance in Southwest China, headed by Gan Li, also published a study on the subject, the Chinese Households Financial Survey (cHFS). According to this report, the country's Gini coefficient was probably closer to 0.61. This body broke the ratio down into 0.56 for urban households and 0.60 for rural households. It also appears from this study that the main source of income inequality in China is disparity in salaries. In urban areas, 53% of income inequality comes from differences in salary; in the countryside the Gini index is made up of 33% for the industrial sector and 22% for agriculture. The CHFS also shows that the more a region is developed and its economy liberalised, the more marked the gaps are. The study showed the 2010 Gini coefficient to be 0.59 in the east of the country, 0.57 in the centre, and 0.55 in the west.Gan Li is very sceptical about whether disparities decreased in China be- tween 2010 and 2012, and hence about the proportions referred to in these two studies. Gan Li speculates that these divergences stem in particular from the fact that over the past ten years, the NBS figures have only taken rural households into account. …