Introduction to Income Redistribution Policies

Presentation on theme: "Introduction to Income Redistribution Policies"— Presentation transcript:

1 Introduction to Income Redistribution Policies
收入再分配政策介绍 Michele Raitano (Sapienza University of Rome) 罗马一大 Training Programme “Effects and Tendency of Income Redistribution Policy” “收入再分配政策的调节效果和调整趋势”赴意大利培训 Italy, October 14th-28th, 2018 2018年10月14-28日 意大利

2 Outline 大纲 Why focusing on distribution 为什么聚焦分配
The concept of wellbeing to be considered and pros and cons of the income concept 需要考虑幸福的概念以及收入概念的正反两方面 The steps of the process of income distribution and the role of pre-distributive and redistributive policies 收入分配过程的环节，以及预分配和再分配政策的功能 Trend of income inequality and redistribution in OECD countries OECD国家收入不平等和再分配趋势 How to measure income redistribution 怎样衡量收入再分配 Main drivers of income inequality trends 收入不平等趋势的主要驱动因素 Main policies to deal with income inequality: predistribution and redistribution 应对收入不平等的主要政策：预分配和再分配

3 The focus on income distributions 收入分配的重点
Analyzing distribution of living standards is crucial in terms of both processes determining it (e.g., why are individuals differently paid?) and its consequences on some aggregate outcomes (e.g., growth, health, social cohesion). 分析生活标准的再分配是很关键的，收入分配过程决定了生活标准（如为什么个人得到的收入不同？），并且其结果对一些总体成果也很关键（如经济增长、医疗卫生、社会凝聚力）。 Which is the best variable for identifying individual welfare? 确定个人福利的最佳变量是什么？ Monetary or non monetary indexes? Mono or multidimensional indexes? 货币或非货币指标？单一指标或多维度指标？ Income. 收入 Consumption. 消费 Wealth. 财富 Functionings and capabilities (Sen). 功能性和能力 Happiness. 快乐

4 Income as the proxy of economic wellbeing 收入是经济福利的替代值
Income is the flow of a stock of wealth (physical, financial and human capital). 收入是一笔财富的流动（物质、财务和人力资源） Monetary and non monetary flows have to be considered. 需要考虑货币或非货币流动 The “Full income” concept (Simons 1938): consumption plus change in wealth => potential consumption. “全收入”概念（Simons 1938年）：消费加财富变化=> 潜在消费 Is it possible to exactly compute all income components? 可能精确地计算所有收入构成部分吗？ Usually, from “full” to disposable income (only considering personal income taxes and cash welfare benefits). 通常来说，从“全”收入到可支配收入（只考虑个人所得税和现金福利待遇） What does this imply in comparisons across countries and across times? 跨国家和跨时间比较的含义是什么

5 Limits in measuring «full income» 衡量全收入的局限性
Empirically it is very difficult to measure all income components: 从实证角度来说，很难衡量所有收入构成部分： Self-employment and business incomes. 自雇和经营收入 Capital gains and changes in asset values. 资产所得和资产价值的变化 Unpaid work => market price or opportunity cost approach? 无偿工作=>市场价格或机会成本方法？ Fringe benefits. 附加福利 Imputed rents from housing. 住房的估算租金 In kind welfare transfers: long term care, education, health care (e.g. actual consumption or individual probabilities to be treated?). 实物型福利转移：长期护理、教育、医疗卫生（如实际消费或个人受到医疗服务的概率？）

6 The steps of personal income distribution (a) 个人收入分配的环节（一）
From individuals to households (using equivalence scales); from distribution to redistribution. 从个人到家庭（使用均等比）；从分配到再分配。 Individual labour earnings: 个人劳动收入 Hourly wages, time of work, unemployment spells. 小时工资，工作时长，失业持续时间 Household (equivalised) market incomes: 家庭的市场收入 Household composition (number of components, ages); 家庭结构（家庭成员的人数和年龄） Employment rates (number of income recipients); 就业率（有收入人员的数量） Non labour earnings. 没有劳动收入的人员 Household (equivalised) disposable incomes: 家庭的可支配收入 Detracting personal taxes and adding cash transfers. 去除个人税，加上现金转移支付 How to impute in kind benefits, imputed rents, tax expenditures, consumption taxes? Usually not considered => disposable instead than full income 怎样估算实物福利，怎样估算租金，怎样估算税项支出和消费税？通常来讲不考虑=>可支配收入代替全收入 Different mechanisms of inequality in the various steps. 不同的环节有不同的应对不平等的机制 Public policies can act in all steps => redistrib. or predistrib.? 可以在所有的环节采取公共政策=>再分配或预分配？

7 The steps of personal income distribution (b) 个人收入分配的环节（二）
Different mechanisms of inequality acting (interacting or in contrast each other) in the various steps. 不同的环节具有不同的应对不平等的机制（之前相互联动或相反） Public policies clearly affect distribution through redistributive measures (tax & transfers, despite the difficulty of considering on income taxes, tax expenditures and in kind transfers). 公共政策通过再分配措施明显影响了分配（税收和转移支付，虽然很难计算收入税、 税项支出和实物转移） However, all public policies affect distribution changing markets equilibria in the first two steps (e.g., changing labour market institutions or through employment policies). 但是，所有对分配产生影响的公共政策在前两个环节改变了市场均衡（如改变了劳动 力市场的体制或通过就业政策） => Public policies can act in all steps: Redistribution and predistribution 所有环节都可以采取公共政策：再分配和预分配

8 Trend of Gini of disposable income 可支配收入基尼系数的发展趋势
加拿大 丹麦 德国 意大利 日本 荷兰 瑞典 英国 美国 8 8

9 Gini of disposable income in EU in 2015 2015年欧盟国家可支配收入基尼系数

10 Gini in the EU before and after the crisis 欧盟国家危机前和危机后基尼系数

11 The recent stability of disposable income ineq. in Italy: a puzzle
Is really inequality rather constant in Italy? 意大利的不平等水平真的保持不变吗？ Was the stability in past years a positive outcome? 过去几年来保持稳定是一个积极的成果吗？ Are survey data proper to capture recent trends? What happens in the tails? 调查数据适用于捕捉近期趋势吗？ Are there large internal movements? 发生了大规模的内部流动吗？ What is happening to market incomes? Are market income inequality related to pensioners only? 市场收入发生了什么？市场收入不平等只与养老金领取人员有关吗？ Is redistribution effectively reducing inequality trends? The role of pensions. 再分配有效降低不平等趋势了吗？养老金的作用。 Can increase in top incomes be faced by redistribution only? 再分配只作用于高收入人群增加吗？ Was inequality reduced by the increase in employment rates? 就业率升高降低了不平等水平吗？

12 Factor decomposition of inequality 不平等的各项因素分解
瑞典 英国 德国 法国 意大利 西班牙 就业 自雇 资本 养老金 现金转移支付

13 Gini of market income 市场收入基尼系数
加拿大 丹麦 德国 意大利 日本 荷兰 瑞典 英国 美国

14 Gini of market income of households headed by those aged 18-65 主要成员年龄在18-65岁家庭的市场收入的基尼系数
加拿大 丹麦 德国 意大利 日本 荷兰 瑞典 英国 美国

15 Top 1% income shares 1%收入最高人群占比
法国 意大利 瑞典 英国 美国

16 Intensity of redistribution 再分配的强度
加拿大 丹麦 德国 意大利 日本 荷兰 瑞典 英国 美国

17 Intensity of redistribution (households headed by individuals aged 18-65) 再分配的强度（主要成员在18-65岁的家庭）
加拿大 丹麦 德国 意大利 日本 荷兰 瑞典 英国 美国

18 Limits in the intensity of redistribution index 再分配强度指标的局限性
Mix between vertical redistribution and redistribution across individuals life phases. 纵向再分配和个人生命不同阶段的再分配。 How much of the difference between Gini of market and disposable income is really due to vertical redistribution? 有多少市场收入和可支配收入基尼系数的差别是真的因为纵向再分配？ What is the role of pensions? 养老金的作用是什么？ Are pensions a mere transfer between individuals instead than between life phases? 养老金仅是不同个体间的转移，而不是不同生命阶段间的转移吗？ Have there been changes across countries and years in the role played by pensions? 养老金对不同国家、不同年份都发生作用了吗？ How to compute redistribution? Do we take into account both payment and benefit sides? 怎样计算再分配？我们同时考虑支付和福利吗？

19 Change in the Gini when cash transfers are not considered (a) 不计算现金转移支付时，基尼系数的变化（一）

20 Change in the Gini when cash transfers are not considered (b) 不计算现金转移支付时，基尼系数的变化（二）

21 Change in the Gini when cash transfers are not considered (c) 不计算现金转移支付时，基尼系数的变化（三）

22 Earnings inequality: P90/P50 薪资不平等： P90/P50
法国 德国 荷兰 瑞典 意大利 英国 美国

23 Gini of annual gross earnings 年度总收益的基尼系数

24 Summarizing the evidence 总结
Generalised rise in inequality, but no common trends => is it possible that inequality strictly depend on «common exogenous natural» factors acting worldwide? 不平等水平普遍上升，但是没有一般趋势=>不平等严格根据作用于全世界的“外生自然”因素吗？ Different indicators and focus on different parts of the income ladder provide some heterogenous findings 收入阶梯的不同指标和重点提供了一些多相性发现。 Are our data able to precisely capture all features of the recent rise in inequality? The case of top incomes and tax havens… 我们的数据能够准确捕捉近期不平等水平上升的所有特点吗？高收入和高避税的情况。。。

25 Usual drivers of inequality trends 不平等趋势的一般驱动因素
Changes in skill premia (between inequality) due to technological progress and globalization affecting demand and supply of differently skilled workers. 技术进步和全球化带来的技能溢价变化（不平等间）影响了不同技能工人的需求和供给。 From SBTC to routinization => polarization (of employment and wages) instead than mere inequality? 从技术进步到程序化=>（就业和工资）两极化，而不仅仅是不平等？ Are these trends strengthened by globalization (offshoring and increasing competition from abroad)? Are these trends natural and unavoidable? 全球化进一步增强了这些趋势吗（离岸和更多的海外竞争）？这些趋势是自然规律并无法避免的吗？ Is a single explanation sound due to the multiple country experiences? 存在一个唯一原因来解释不同国家的经验吗？ Are skill premia responsible of the rise in top incomes? 技能溢价是高收入继续上升的原因吗？

26 How much inequality is explained by education? 教育对不平等的作用比例

27 Is the trend of inequality in Italy explained by education
年收入 周工资

28 Further possible (maybe main) drivers 下一步可能的（也许是主要的）驱动 因素
What are the determinants of super-earnings? Talent and popularity in “winner takes all markets” or power producing rents? How competitive are the markets? 超高收入的决定因素有哪些？在“赢家占领市场”方面，人才和受欢迎程度是决定因素吗？市场的竞争性是什么？ Is there an oligarch capitalism? 存在寡头资本主义吗？ What is the role played by finance? 金融的作用是什么？ What is the role played by “structural” reforms? “结构性”改革的作用是什么？ How has the bargaining power between labour and capital changed? 劳动力和资本间的议价能力发生了怎样的变化？ Has there been an individualization of economic conditions? 发生了经济条件个体化了吗？ Country specific policies towards different levels of market inequality. 针对市场不平等不同水平的国别政策。 Trends in tax & benefit systems. 税收和福利体系的发展趋势。

29 Policies to deal with inequality: an outline 解决不平等的政策：大纲
Predistributive strategies 预分配战略 Taxes and redistribution 税收和再分配 The welfare state: objectives, characteristics, type of transfers, benefits entitlement and computation rules 福利体系：目标、特点、转移支付的类型、福利资格、计算规则 Welfare transfers and redistribution 福利转移支付和再分配 Pros and cons of targeted welfare transfers 有针对性的福利转移支付的益处和弊端

30 Predistributive strategies 预分配战略
Levelling endowments 条件 Human capital (quantity, quality and its heterogeneity) 人力资本（数量、质量和多相性） Wealth (mostly due to inheritances) 财富（大多来自继承） Change the rules of the game 改变游戏规则 Antitrust not only interested at reducing prices 反垄断并不只是降低价格 Weakening power related to asymmetric information, property rights, joint consumption => act on firms’ governance 信息不对称、财产权、共同消费等有关的削弱力=>对企业管理起到作用 Predistributive effects of redistribution 再分配的预分配效应 Link between top gross income shares and marginal tax rates. 最高净收益占比与边际税率之间的联系 Incentives to accumulate due to the lack of inheritance taxes 由于缺少继承税，对财富积累起到了刺激作用 Basic/minimum incomes might change workers’ option value 基本/最低收入可能改变了职工的选择价值

31 Taxes and effects on redistribution (a) 税收及其对再分配的效应（一）
Taxes have to be assessed according to the tax base: 必须根据税基来评估税收 Persons’ incomes (labour and capital incomes) 个人收入（劳动和资本收入） Firms’ incomes 企业收入 Properties 资产 Consumption 消费 Tax expenditures 税项支出 The effects of taxes on income distribution has to be assessed according to the type of income concept that is affects: i) individuals’ labour incomes; ii) market incomes; iii) disposable incomes; iv) full (extended) incomes 税收对收入分配的效应必须根据收入概念的类型进行评估，这会影响：1、个人的劳动收入；2、市场收入；3、可支配收入；4、全收入（延伸收入）。

32 Taxes and effects on redistribution (b) 税收及其对再分配的效应（二）
Different taxes affect different income concepts; e.g., consumption taxes act on full income, personal income taxes on individual income. 不同的税收影响了不同的收入概念，例如消费税对全收入的影响，个人所得税对个人收入的影响。 Progressivity may be assessed within a certain income source or – in general – looking at the effects of disposable/full incomes, thus moving from the individual to the household. 累进性可以在一定收入来源内进行评估，或一般来说，评估对可支配收入/全收入的效应，因此，需要从个人层面转向家庭层面。

33 Taxes and effects on redistribution (c) 税收及其对再分配的效应（三）
When assessing the effects on distribution 2 effects to be distinguished to assess the progressivity of a tax programme: 在评估分配效应时，需要区分两种效应以评估税收的累进性 Composition effects, between those burdened or not by a certain tax (e.g., taxes on capital incomes between those with or not capital incomes) 结构效应 Price effects, different relative effects on those who are burdened by a certain tax (e.g., taxes on capital incomes within those holding these incomes) 价格效应

34 What is the welfare state? 什么是福利制度？
How to define it? 怎样确定？ Social assistance or social insurance tool? 社会救助或社会保险工具？ Public or private instruments? 公共或私人措施？ Public financing and/or public supply? 公共资金和/或公共供给？ What components should be included? 都包括什么内容？ How to finance it? Social contribution vs general taxation? 怎样提供资金？社会缴费还是一般类税收？ Espros classification by risks sources in EU. 欧盟对风险来源的分类。

35 Welfare State objectives 福利制度的目标
1. Efficiency: macro (total social spending), micro (spending composition), incentives (on individual behaviours). 效率：宏观（社会总支出），微观（支出结构），激励措施（对个人行为）。 2. Living standards protecion: anti-poverty, insurance and income smoothing (life cycle). 对生活标准的保护：反贫困、保险和收益平滑（生命周期）。 3. Inequality decrease: vertical and horizontal equity => entitlements and computation formulas. 降低不平等：纵向平等和横向平等=>受益资格和计算公式。 4. Social cohesion: dignity without stigma and social solidarities (positive freedom as capabilities). 社会凝聚：没有耻辱的体面生活和社会团结（积极自由是能力）。 5. Administrative management: information for citizens, no abuses (no I and II order errors in case of means tested benefits). 行政管理：向公民提供信息，不滥用信息。 Normative roles given to the various objectives => different WS models (e.g. universal vs residual) Often trade off between the objectives. 各个目标都有规范性作用=>不同的福利制度模式（如普惠型和剩余型）。 各个目标间经常会权衡。

36 Types of welfare state transfers 福利制度转移支付的类型
Their nature: cash or in kind or specific cash transfers (vouchers). 其本质：现金或实物或特殊的现金转移支付（代金券）。 b) The transfer entitlement: 转移支付的受益资格 Social insurance: specific event and seniority record. 社会保险：特别的事件或资历记录。 Pure universal transfer: only contingency. 单纯的普惠型转移支付： 仅在意外事故时。 Means tested benefit: based on income threshold and, in cases, on events occurrence. 经过家计调查的福利待遇：根据收入标准，有些情况下也根据发生的事件。 Transfer sectorial: only to employees? The degree of corporativism. 转移支付的范围：只针对雇员？社团主义的程度。 Rights linked to citizenship or to employment (with some duties)? Welfare or workfare? 与公民权或就业有关的权利（也有一些义务）？福利或职业福利？

37 The benefit computation formula and the distributive effects
福利待遇计算 公示和分配效果 Is there a link between the entitlement and the formula? 待遇资格和公示有联系吗？ Are also insurance benefit redistributive? 保险待遇具有再分配功能吗？ Crucial factors: risk exposition, entitlement conditions, links between contributions and benefits. 关键因素：面临风险、资格条件、缴费和待遇之间的关系

38 Welfare regimes in the EU 欧盟福利制度
Beveridgian and Bismarckian models. 贝弗里奇和俾斯麦模式 The literature on welfare regimes: 福利制度相关文献资料 Esping Andersen (1990) classification (extended by Ferrera 1996). Esping Andersen（于1990年）的分类（Ferrera于1996年进一步延伸） Usually 4 models: 通常分为四类模式 Social-democratic (Scandinavian); 社会-人口模式（斯堪的纳维亚） Liberal (Anglo-saxon); 自由主义模式 （盎格鲁-撒克逊） Corporative (Continental); 合作模式（欧洲大陆） Southern. 南部模式 Regimes identified interacting the roles of families, state, markets; the degree of targeting and universalism (i.e., stratification); the corporativisms; the decommodification; the financing method. 制度的确立包括了家庭、国家、市场的交织作用；定位性和普惠性的程度；社团主义；去商品化；融资 方法。

39 Welfare state and redistribution (1) 福利制度和再分配（一）
Is redistribution a main WS aim? 再分配是福利制度的一个主要目标吗？ Effects through taxes and transfers. 税收和转移支付的效应 Combination between “piggy bank” and “Robin Hood” => what is the combined impact? “存钱罐”和“罗宾汉”的组合=>组合影响是什么？ No redistribution by means of insurances? Or differentiated effects due to premium, benefit and the risk probability? 保险没有再分配功能？或保费、待遇和风险概率带来的差别化效应？ Horizontal (through life phases) and vertical redistribution. 横向（贯穿生命周期）和纵向再分配 Is there an effect on inequality also in horizontal redistribution? 横向再分配也对不公平产生影响吗？ What is the target efficiency of these benefits? Is there a paradox of redistribution of targeting? 这些福利待遇的目标效果是什么？再分配的目标性存在悖论吗？

40 Welfare state and redistribution (2) 福利制度和再分配（二）
Biased pre-post comparisons: WS affects pretax distribution: 有偏见的前-后比较：福利制度影响税前再分配： WS increases market inequalities affecting zero earners (retired, lone mothers, unemployed) and providing lower incentives to work. 福利制度增加了市场不平等，影响了零收入者（退休、单亲母亲、失业人员等），并降低了对工作的激励。 Different effects if combined to ALMPs and workfare. 如果结合使用积极劳动力市场政策和职业福利制，则会产生不同的效应。 WS as provider of resources changing individual income potential => WS as “social investment state” in education and health. But what is the impact on inequality? 福利制度作为资源的提供者，改变了个人的收入潜力=>福利制度在教育和医疗方面是“社会投资国家”。但是对不平等的影响是什么？ Welfare state also affects net wealth distribution across countries, changing individuals’ incentives to save 福利制度还影响了各个国家的净财富分配，改变了对个人储蓄的激励

41 Welfare and redistribution (3) 福利制度和再分配（三）
Is there a pure counterfactual? 存在纯粹的反事实吗？ Redistribution assessed on the life-cycle or deleting some groups of individuals? 在全生命周期对再分配进行评估，或去除一些人群？ How to measure the role of in kind transfers? And the role of tax expenditures? 怎样衡量实物型转移支付的功能？税项支出的作用？ How to assess the interplay of public and private schemes? 怎样评估公共和私人制度的相互影响？

42 WS and redistribution 福利制度和再分配
Analyzing how different WS features impact on income distribution => Distribution = f (WS, X, Y) 分析不同福利制度（WS）的特点怎样对收入分配产生影响=>再分配= f (WS, X, Y) [Where Y is a set of WS complementary political instruments (e.g. labor market institutions), and X are policy exogenous variables] [其中Y是福利制度的补充政策工具（如劳动力市场制度）， X是政策的外生变量] Both sides of this relationship have to be specified better than it is commonly assumed in the literature: 这种关系的两方面必须比文件资料中的一般观点更加详细： WS is a very complex institution; every connection between its features have to be deeply evaluated. 福利制度是一种非常复杂的体制；必须深入评估其不同特性的每一种联系。 The current analyses are based on very rough methodology: simple correlations or econometric models without enough control variables. 目前的分析基于非常粗糙的方法论：没有足够控制变量的简单统计或计量 经济模型。

43 The left side limits 限制和不足
Which reference population? 参考人口是哪些？ Incomes or “economic resources”? 收入或“经济来源”？ How to measure redistribution? 怎样衡量再分配？

44 1. Reference population 参考人口
Generally core labor force population - aged is used for: 一般来说，核心劳动人口在25-29岁之间，主要用于： Data availability; 数据的可获得性 Emphasis on earnings; 重点在于薪资 More focus on “true” vertical transfers; 更多的针对“真实的”纵向转移支付 Too much emphasis on poverty reduction and transfers effects if the whole population is considered; 如果考虑全部人口，重点将会过多的放在扶贫和转移支付效果上 But this approach has many drawbacks: 但是这种方法也存在很多不足： The median voter is getting older; 中位选民的年龄增大 Comparability among countries with different elderly employment rates; 老年人就业率不同的国家间的可比较性 Pension transfers are not simply actuarial: many different distributive channels, depending on formulas and requirements; 养老金转移支付不仅是简单的精算：根据计算公式和资格要求，有很多不同的分配渠道 The need to analyze the many distributive effects of pension reforms; 需要分析养老保险改革的分配效应 A weak correlations between pension system generosity and pre-transfer poverty. 养老体系的发放金额和转移支付前的贫困率存在较弱的正向关联

45 2. Incomes or economic resources 收入或经济来源
Standard analysis focus only on “market” and “disposable” income; 标准分析的重点只是“市场”和“可支配”收入 To evaluate the redistributive WS effects and its tendencies, in-kind benefits and tax expenditures have to be added. 分析福利制度的再分配效应及其发展趋势，需要增加实物福利和税项支出 But how to impute in-kind transfers? 但是怎样估算实物转移支付 Which are the counter-factual of tax expenditures, their link with the private schemes spreading and their distributive channels? 税项支出的反事实有哪些？与私营体系普遍化及其分配渠道的联系是什么？ In addition: 加上 Transfers have to be considered net of taxes; 对于转移支付，需要考虑纳税后净额 In a resource perspective, disposable income should be corrected also by indirect taxes (sometimes used to finance WS). 在来源方面，应当根据间接税修正可支配收入（一些时候为福利体系提供资金） Towards a “full (extended) income” concept? 迈向一个“全（延伸）收入”概念？

46 3. How to measure redistribution? 怎样衡量再分配？
The first studies used public social spending as dependent variable, but it is a very poor proxy of redistribution (it is an input!) 首次进行的研究使用公共社会支出作为因变量，但是这是一个很差的再分配替代值（这是一个输入变量！） The more recent studies focus on outcomes measures, computing redistribution by a “Pre” and “Post” approach – based on Gini index, but there are some caveats: 最近开展的研究重点是成果衡量，根据基尼指数，通过“前”和“后”的方法计算再分配，但是也存在一些需要注意的地方： Gini index empathizes middle class transfers; 基尼指数较倾斜于对中产阶级的转移支付； In a counterfactual logic “Pre” is different from “In the Absence of”; WS effects have to be evaluated in every step of the distributive path. 在反事实逻辑中，“前”与“缺少”不同；分配过程中的每一个步骤都应评估福利体系的效果； And using Gini, the absolute difference or the percentage change? Is there a level effect? Are there diminishing returns in inequality reduction efforts? 使用基尼系数、绝对差或百分比变动？存在杠杆效应吗？降低不平等的工作产生了递减效应吗？ Given different implicit objectives, poverty or distribution indexes? 不同的隐含目标、贫困或分配指数？

47 The right side limits 限制和不足
How to “measure” the welfare state [also known as “the dependent variable problem” in political science literature]? 怎样“衡量”福利制度？[在政治学文献资料中也被称为“应变量问题”] Which are welfare policies limits (e.g. have to be included also education, full-employment?) 福利政策的不足有哪些？（如必须包含教育和充分就业） Literature is neither able to define if there has been a retrenchment in last 20 years, depending on how WS is measured (spending, entitlements, outcomes)… 文献资料也未能根据福利体系是怎样衡量的，确定过去20年是否存在紧缩（支出、待遇资格、成果）。。。。。 Two usual measures: 一般采取的两个方法 Social Spending 社会支出 Entitlements 待遇资格

48 Social spending is not a perfect proxy of a welfare state model…
社会支出不是福利体系模式的一个完美替代值 Spending = f [entitlements (replacement rates, duration..), recipients (elderly, unemployed…), GDP, production costs for services] 支出= f [待遇资格（替代率、发放时间。。。），待遇领取人员（老年人、失业人员。。。），GDP，服务的生产成本] …and different components of social spending may have very different distributive consequences, 。。。并且社会支出的不同内容会产生非常不同的分配效果 …and are included in kind transfers, taxes and tax expenditures? 。。。并且包括实物转移支付、税收和税项支出吗？

49 2. Entitlements 待遇资格 Entitlements indicators seem more fruitful for defining WS models and analyze their differences and the impact of social policies on recipients. 待遇资格相关指标对确定福利制度的模式并分析其差别，以及分析社会政策对待遇领取人员的影响更为有效。 Recent datasets are useful, but here too there are many limits: 近期的数据库非常有用，但是也存在很多不足： Indicators do not seem robust to different specifications; 各项指标没有不同的具体参数； They are based on few (one or two) illustrative individuals; 各项指标只根据少数（一个或两个）例证个体；

50 They depend strongly on the reference year.
各项指标主要根据参考年份； They do not incorporate introduced but still transitional changes in norms. 各项指标包括了引入的标准，但尚在过渡中； They are based only on cash transfers!!! What happens to regime theory if services are included? Does education have to be included too? And if yes, which education level? Tax expenditures and the access to private schemes are not considered. 各项指标只基于现金转移支付！！！那么对于包括了服务的制度理论呢？如果也包括教育呢？如果包括，教育水平是什么？没有计算税项支出和获得的私营体系。

51 Disentangling targeting 对定位的理解
Is targeting really more redistributive and costs saving than universalism? 与普惠性相比，定位性的再分配和成本节约效果确实更大吗？ Is there a redistribution paradox? 存在再分配悖论吗？ What happens when also private schemes are considered? 如果包括私营制度会怎样？ Targeting and universalism have to be compared in connection with the explicit benefit formula. 在比较定位性和普惠性时，需要与精确的待遇计算公式相结合。 Three types of targeting: 定位的三种类型 Categorical 分类型 Means tested 家计调查型 Self targeting 自我定位型

52 Pros and cons of targeting 定位性的益处和弊端
Pros of targeting 益处 Target efficiency then less poverty and more equality with minor costs 定位的有效性在贫困方面较低，但通过较低成本可以提高公平性。 but the paradox of redistribution could appear: the efficiency of each unit of redistribution vs. how many units are available [is the budget sensible to political constituencies]? 但是会出现再分配悖论：再分配每个单位的有效性vs.可获得多少个单位[预算对政治选区来说是敏感的吗？]

53 - Leakages (I & II type errors – especially for categorical)
The cons of targeting: 弊端 - Leakages (I & II type errors – especially for categorical) 泄漏（第一类和第二类错误---尤其对于分类型） Administrative costs ( especially for means-tested) 行政成本（尤其是对于家计调查型） Incentives (poverty traps) 激励措施（贫困陷阱） Take up and stigma (especially for self targeting and for means tested information failures) 侮辱（尤其对于自我定位和家计调查信息泄露） Towards a citizenship (basic) income? 迈向公民（基本）收入？