This book tries to portray the link between economic inequality and long-run growth via human capital and the major take of the book is to analyze the growth panorama through the lens of the ‘idea’ or ‘knowledge’ generation’ which is eventually considered as the ‘engine of growth’ being fueled by productivity enhancement through the innovations of new technologies. But this is not the end of the story as it involves enormous controversies. Simply the controversy started with the basic question --- why are some countries richer than other countries? To put it in another way, why growth is a miracle, why it is not driven homogeneously for economies, or whether the economies would converge or not? Another issue is predominantly crucial, that is, economic inequality in the process of economic expansion. In this context, the present book has given emphasis in explaining the selective growth theories starting from classical foundation to new growth theories including their inner implications in the passage of history of economic growth. In consequence, the vast landscape of theoretical contours about political philosophies and model analyses of economic growth including diverse generic versions of the said link between economic expansion and distribution are explained, and, the most important feature of the textbook is that the link is explored by focusing on a single factor, human capital. The prime emphasis of the present textbook is to look at the link between growth, inequality and human capital accumulation and their resultant outcomes in a new way as New Look by substantiating the issue through empirical analyses relating to the Indian States. The whole journey of the book consists of the political philosophy, models and empirics, the trio, without which the all-around venture of economic theories would become incomplete. For this reason, the whole perspective of empirical analysis is done to keep in mind the necessities of the learners such that they should not feel awkward with a set of data. It is, in that context, the empirical and structural issues are taken up to make the issues distinctively clearer with the presumption that the whole perspective would become, then, more delightful and easy to digest.

We posit that the relationship between income inequality and economic growth is mediated by the level of equality of opportunity, which we identify with intergenerational mobility. In economies characterized by intergenerational rigidities, an increase in income inequality has persistent effects—for example by hindering human capital accumulation— thereby retarding future growth disproportionately. We use several recently developed internationally comparable measures of intergenerational mobility to confirm that the negative impact of income inequality on growth is higher the lower is intergenerational mobility. Our results suggest that omitting intergenerational mobility leads to misspecification, shedding light on why the empirical literature on income inequality and growth has been so inconclusive.

Essays exploring the relationship between economic growth and inequality and the implications for policy makers.

This paper analyzes the extent of income inequality from a global perspective, its drivers, and what to do about it. The drivers of inequality vary widely amongst countries, with some common drivers being the skill premium associated with technical change and globalization, weakening protection for labor, and lack of financial inclusion in developing countries. We find that increasing the income share of the poor and the middle class actually increases growth while a rising income share of the top 20 percent results in lower growth—that is, when the rich get richer, benefits do not trickle down. This suggests that policies need to be country specific but should focus on raising the income share of the poor, and ensuring there is no hollowing out of the middle class. To tackle inequality, financial inclusion is imperative in emerging and developing countries while in advanced economies, policies should focus on raising human capital and skills and making tax systems more progressive.

The Fund has recognized in recent years that one cannot separate issues of economic growth and stability on one hand and equality on the other. Indeed, there is a strong case for considering inequality and an inability to sustain economic growth as two sides of the same coin. Central to the Fund’s mandate is providing advice that will enable members’ economies to grow on a sustained basis. But the Fund has rightly been cautious about recommending the use of redistributive policies given that such policies may themselves undercut economic efficiency and the prospects for sustained growth (the so-called “leaky bucket” hypothesis written about by the famous Yale economist Arthur Okun in the 1970s). This SDN follows up the previous SDN on inequality and growth by focusing on the role of redistribution. It finds that, from the perspective of the best available macroeconomic data, there is not a lot of evidence that redistribution has in fact undercut economic growth (except in extreme cases). One should be careful not to assume therefore—as Okun and others have—that there is a big tradeoff between redistribution and growth. The best available macroeconomic data do not support such a conclusion.

One side in the current debate about who benefits from growth has focused solely on average impacts on poverty and inequality, while the other side has focused on the diverse welfare impacts found beneath the averages. Both sides have a point.

Is there a tradeoff between raising growth and reducing inequality and poverty? This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on the complex links between growth, inequality, and poverty, with causation going in both directions. The evidence suggests that growth can be effective in reducing poverty, but its impact on inequality is ambiguous and depends on the underlying sources of growth. The impact of poverty and inequality on growth is likewise ambiguous, as several channels mediate the relationship. But most plausible mechanisms suggest that poverty and inequality reduce growth, at least in the long run. Policies play a role in shaping these relationships and those designed to improve equality of opportunity can simultaneously improve inclusiveness and growth.