Income Distribution, 1970–76
Income Distribution, 1970–76
复制标题
收入分配，1970–76
DOI：
10.1080/00074917912331333501
复制
发表时间：
1979
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Sundrum
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Sundrum
中央统计局在其一系列社会经济调查中定期收集关于收入分配和消费模式的数据。《经济学人》前几期的一些文章对其中一些调查发表了评论。对于研究随时间变化情况的调查的可比性，一直存在严重的怀疑。最具可比性的调查是1970年1月至4月和1976年再次进行的调查。即使在这种情况下，1970年的报告也给出了按人均收入分配的数据，1976年的报告也给出了按家庭收入分配的数据；这样的数据不具有可比性，因为人均收入随家庭规模的不同而有系统地变化。在最近一本题为《印度尼西亚的经济增长和收入分配》的专著中，与收集和汇编数据密切相关的两位专家--联合国政府和国民账户顾问LN Perera博士和中央统计局统计发展司的SRI Budianti女士--提供了这两年按家庭成员人均支出进行分配的数据。这是研究1970年至1976年经济快速增长期间收入分配变化的第一个真正具有可比性的系列。根据本报告的数据，表1显示了按主要区域分列的人均每月支出以及这些区域的人均支出占全国平均水平的百分比。为了估计生活水平的差异，我们必须考虑到地区价格差异。不幸的是，我们没有好的估计，没有考虑到城乡价格的差异。1970年，在没有这种价格调整的情况下，城市收入比农村收入高出43%(爪哇为67%，外岛为21%)：到1976年，这一差距扩大到84%(爪哇为109%，外岛为49%)。1970年，外岛的人均货币支出比爪哇高54%(城市21%，农村66%)。这种差异很大程度上可以归因于价格差异；地区
The Central Bureau of Statistics has collected data periodically on income distribution and consumption patterns in its series of Socio-Economic Surveys. A number of articles in previous issues of the BlES have commented on some of these surveys. There have been serious doubts about the comparability of surveys for the study of changes over time. The most comparable of the surveys are those carried out between January and April in 1970 and again in 1976. Even in this case, the 1970 report gave the distributions according to per capita income and the 1976 report according to household income; such data are not comparable because per capita income varies systematically with household size. In a recent monograph entitled Economic Growth and the Distribution of Income inIndonesia, by two experts closely associated with the collection and compilation of the data, Dr LN Perera, United Nations Adviser on Government and National Accounts and Mrs Sri Budianti of the Statistical Development Division of the Central Bureau of Statistics, data have been made available for both years on the distribution of households according to the per capita expenditure of their members. This is the first truly comparable series for studying changes in income distribution during the period of rapid economic growth between 1970 and 1976. Based on the data from this report, Table 1 shows per capita monthly expenditure by main region and per capita expenditure in these regions as a percentage of the average for the whole country. In order to estimate differences in the standard of living, we must allow for regional price disparities. Unfortunately, we have no good estirr, ate of differences between urban and rural prices. Without such price adjustments, urban income was 43 per cent higher than rural income in 1970 (67 per cent in Java and 21 per cent in Outer Islands): by 1976 this disparity had increased to 84 per cent (109 per cent in Java and 49 per cent in Outer Islands). The per capita money expenditure in the Outer Islands in 1970 was 54 per cent higher than in Java (21 per cent urban, 66 per cent rural). A considerable part of this difference may he attributed to price disparities; the regional