Paper detail

How to (Not) Estimate Gini Coefficients for Fat Tailed Variables

Direct measurements of Gini coefficients by conventional arithmetic calculations are a poor estimator, even if paradoxically, they include the entire population, as because of super-additivity they cannot lend themselves to comparisons between units of different size, and intertemporal analyses are vitiated by the population changes. The Gini of aggregated units A and B will be higher than those of A and B computed separately. This effect becomes more acute with fatness of tails. When the sample size is smaller than entire population, the error is extremely high. The conventional literature on Gini coefficients cannot be trusted and comparing countries of different sizes makes no sense; nor does it make sense to make claims of "changes in inequality" based on conventional measures. We compare the standard methodologies to the indirect methods via maximum likelihood estimation of tail exponent. We compare to the tail method which is unbiased, with considerably lower error rate. We also consider measurement errors of the tail exponent and suggest a simple but efficient methodology to calculate Gini coefficients.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author4 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.