Measuring the incidence of public spending in education requires an intergenerational framework distinguishing between what current and future generations - that is, parents and children - give and receive. In standard distributional incidence analysis, households are assumed to receive a benefit equal to what is spent on their children enrolled in the public schooling system and, implicitly, to pay a fee proportional to their income. This paper shows that, in an intergenerational framework, this is equivalent to assuming perfectly altruistic individuals, in the sense of the dynastic model, and perfect capital markets. But in practice, credit markets are imperfect and poor households cannot borrow against the future income of their children. The authors show that under such circumstances, standard distributional incidence analysis may greatly over-estimate the progressivity of public spending in education: educational improvements that are progressive in the long-run steady state may actually be regressive for the current generation of poor adults. This is especially true where service delivery in education is highly inefficient - as it is in poor districts of many developing countries - so that the educational benefits received are relatively low in comparison with the cost of public spending. The results have implications for both policy measures and analytical approaches.

Abstract: Measuring the incidence of public spending in education requires an intergenerational framework distinguishing between what current and future generations - that is, parents and children - give and receive. In standard distributional incidence analysis, households are assumed to receive a benefit equal to what is spent on their children enrolled in the public schooling system and, implicitly, to pay a fee proportional to their income. This paper shows that, in an intergenerational framework, this is equivalent to assuming perfectly altruistic individuals, in the sense of the dynastic model, and perfect capital markets. But in practice, credit markets are imperfect and poor households cannot borrow against the future income of their children. The authors show that under such circumstances, standard distributional incidence analysis may greatly over-estimate the progressivity of public spending in education: educational improvements that are progressive in the long-run steady state may actually be regressive for the current generation of poor adults. This is especially true where service delivery in education is highly inefficient - as it is in poor districts of many developing countries - so that the educational benefits received are relatively low in comparison with the cost of public spending. The results have implications for both policy measures and analytical approaches.

What new theories, evidence, explanations, and policies have shaped our studies of income distribution in the 21st century? Editors Tony Atkinson and Francois Bourguignon assemble the expertise of leading authorities in this survey of substantive issues. In two volumes they address subjects that were not covered in Volume 1 (2000), such as education, health and experimental economics; and subjects that were covered but where there have been substantial new developments, such as the historical study of income inequality and globalization. Some chapters discuss future growth areas, such as inheritance, the links between inequality and macro-economics and finance, and the distributional implications of climate change. They also update empirical advances and major changes in the policy environment. - The volumes define and organize key areas of income distribution studies - Contributors focus on identifying newly developing questions and opportunities for future research - The authoritative articles emphasize the ways that income mobility and inequality studies have recently gained greater political significance

This work examines the relationship between equity and growth in Mexico. It looks at how specific inequalities in power, wealth and status have created and sustained economic institutions and policies that both tend to perpetuate these inequalities and are sources of inefficiences in the economy.

Measuring the incidence of public spending in education requires an intergenerational framework distinguishing between what current and future generations - that is, parents and children - give and receive. In standard distributional incidence analysis, households are assumed to receive a benefit equal to what is spent on their children enrolled in the public schooling system and, implicitly, to pay a fee proportional to their income. This paper shows that, in an intergenerational framework, this is equivalent to assuming perfectly altruistic individuals, in the sense of the dynastic model, and perfect capital markets. But in practice, credit markets are imperfect and poor households cannot borrow against the future income of their children. The authors show that under such circumstances, standard distributional incidence analysis may greatly over-estimate the progressivity of public spending in education: educational improvements that are progressive in the long-run steady state may actually be regressive for the current generation of poor adults. This is especially true where service delivery in education is highly inefficient - as it is in poor districts of many developing countries - so that the educational benefits received are relatively low in comparison with the cost of public spending. The results have implications for both policy measures and analytical approaches.

Edited by Nora Lustig, the Commitment to Equity Handbook: Estimating the Impact of Fiscal Policy on Inequality and Poverty (Brookings Institution Press and CEQ Institute-Tulane University, 2nd edition, 2022) is a unique manual on the theory and practical methods to estimate the impact of taxation and public spending on inequality and poverty. In addition, the second edition covers frontier topics such as alternative approaches to measure the redistributive effect of education, health, and infrastructure spending. Policymakers, social planners, and economists are provided with a step-by-step guide to applying fiscal incidence analysis, illustrated by country studies. The 2nd edition of the Handbook has two volumes. Volume 1 is comprised of Part I, Methodology, describes what a CEQ Assessment© is and presents the theoretical underpinnings of fiscal incidence analysis and the indicators used to assess the distributive impact and effectiveness of fiscal policy. Part II, Implementation, presents the methodology on how taxes, subsidies, and social spending should be allocated. It includes a step-by step guide to completing the CEQ Master Workbook©, a multi-sheet Excel file that houses detailed information on the country’s fiscal system and the results used as inputs for policy discussions, academic papers, and policy reports. Part III, “Applications,” presents applications of the CEQ framework to low- and middle-income countries and includes simulations of policy reforms. In this 2nd edition, chapters 1, 6, and 8 have been significantly updated and two new country studies have been added to Part III. Parts IV (updated), V (new), and VI (new) are available online only. Part IV contains the CEQ Assessment’s main tools. Part V includes the databases housed in the CEQ Data Center on Fiscal Redistribution. Part VI contains the CEQ Institute’s microsimulation tools. Volume 2 (new) includes a collection of chapters whose purpose is to expand the knowledge and methodological frontiers to sharpen even further the analysis of fiscal policy’s redistributive impact. Topics include: alternative approaches to value in-kind education and health services; alternative methods to evaluate spending on infrastructure; corporate taxes and taxation on capital incomes; inter-temporal fiscal incidence and the redistributive consequences of social insurance pensions; fiscal redistribution, macroeconomic stability and growth; and, the political economy of fiscal redistribution.

'The Impact of School Infrastructure on Learning: A Synthesis of the Evidence provides an excellent literature review of the resources that explore the areas of focus for improved student learning, particularly the aspiration for “accessible, well-built, child-centered, synergetic and fully realized learning environments.†? Written in a style which is both clear and accessible, it is a practical reference for senior government officials and professionals involved in the planning and design of educational facilities, as well as for educators and school leaders. --Yuri Belfali, Head of Division, Early Childhood and Schools, OECD Directorate for Education and Skills This is an important and welcome addition to the surprisingly small, evidence base on the impacts of school infrastructure given the capital investment involved. It will provide policy makers, practitioners, and those who are about to commission a new build with an important and comprehensive point of reference. The emphasis on safe and healthy spaces for teaching and learning is particularly welcome. --Harry Daniels, Professor of Education, Department of Education, Oxford University, UK This report offers a useful library of recent research to support the, connection between facility quality and student outcomes. At the same time, it also points to the unmet need for research to provide verifiable and reliable information on this connection. With such evidence, decisionmakers will be better positioned to accurately balance the allocation of limited resources among the multiple competing dimensions of school policy, including the construction and maintenance of the school facility. --David Lever, K-12 Facility Planner, Former Executive Director of the Interagency Committee on School Construction, Maryland Many planners and designers are seeking a succinct body of research defining both the issues surrounding the global planning of facilities as well as the educational outcomes based on the quality of the space provided. The authors have finally brought that body of evidence together in this well-structured report. The case for better educational facilities is clearly defined and resources are succinctly identified to stimulate the dialogue to come. We should all join this conversation to further the process of globally enhancing learning-environment quality! --David Schrader, AIA, Educational Facility Planner and Designer, Former Chairman of the Board of Directors, Association for Learning Environments (A4LE)