Equivalence scales: rationales, uses and assumptions
Equivalence scales: rationales, uses and assumptions
复制标题
等价量表：基本原理、用途和假设
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Burchardt
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Chanfreau;T. Burchardt
在贫困和收入不平等研究中，等价表被用来调整不同规模和组成的家庭的相对生活成本或假定的生活水平。这使得收入(或支出)信息可与给定的参考单位相比较，因为考虑到大家庭的规模经济以及按所述特征的不同需要，通常是家庭中的儿童人数。参考单位通常是单身成人家庭，或者在英国更常见的是没有子女的成年夫妇家庭。推导等值比额表的方法和它们所作的规范性假设都受到相当大的争议，而且没有普遍使用的“正确”比例表。规模的选择取决于对规模经济的假设、对不同个人需求的判断、数据限制和确保结果可比性的一般惯例。不同的尺度会在贫困程度、受贫困影响的群体以及不同国家的排名方面产生不同的结果(Coulter，Cowell&Jenkins，1992；经合组织，北达科他州；Rio Group，2006)。欧盟统计局评论说，在等值比额表之间切换(从原来的经合组织改为经修订的经合组织)对某些分组的贫困率的影响比对全体人口的影响更大。因此，粗略的比额表虽然对大家庭的规模经济很重要，但不能完全考虑到家庭构成的复杂性(CPS，1998)。
In poverty and income inequality research, equivalence scales are used to adjust for the relative cost of living, or assumed standard of living, of households of different sizes and composition. This makes income (or expenditure) information comparable to a given reference unit by taking into account the economies of scale of larger households as well as differing needs by stated characteristics, generally the number of children in the household. The reference unit is often a single adult household, or, more commonly in the UK, a childless adult couple household. Both the methods for deriving equivalence scales and the normative assumptions made by them are subject to considerable debate, and there is no “correct” scale for general use. The choice of scale depends on assumptions about economies of scale, judgements about different individuals’ needs, data constraints and general conventions to ensure comparability of results. Different scales lead to different results in terms of the level of poverty, the groups affected by poverty and the ranking of different countries (Coulter, Cowell & Jenkins, 1992; OECD, n.d.; Rio Group, 2006). Eurostat comment that switching between equivalence scales (from the original to the modified OECD) has a larger effect on poverty rates among certain subgroups than for the overall population. Thus, while important to account for the economies of scale for larger households, the crude scales are unable to take the full complexity of household composition into account (CPS, 1998).