|
EconStor >
Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson (NY) >
Levy Economics Institute of Bard College >
Working Papers, Levy Economics Institute of Bard College >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10419/31536
|
| | |
| Title: | | Caste and wealth inequality in India  |
| Authors: | | Zacharias, Ajit Vakulabharanam, Vamsi |
| Issue Date: | | 2009 |
| Series/Report no.: | | Working papers // The Levy Economics Institute 566 |
| Abstract: | | In this paper, we conduct the novel exercise of analyzing the relationship between overall wealth inequality and caste divisions in India using nationally representative surveys on household wealth conducted during 199192 and 200203. According to our findings, the groups in India that are generally considered disadvantaged (known as Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes) have, as one would expect, substantially lower wealth than the forward caste groups, while the Other Backward Classes and non-Hindus occupy positions in the middle. Using the ANOGI decomposition technique, we estimate that between-caste inequality accounted for about 13 percent of overall wealth inequality in 200203, in part due to the considerable heterogeneity within the broadly defined caste groups. The stratification parameters indicate that the forward caste Hindus overlap little with the other caste groups, while the latter have significantly higher degrees of overlap with one another and with the overall population. Using this method, we are also able to comment on the emergence and strengthening of a creamy layer, or relatively well-off group, among the disadvantaged castes, especially the Scheduled Tribes. |
| Subjects: | | Caste inequality distribution of wealth |
| JEL: | | D31 D63 J15 |
| Document Type: | | Working Paper |
| Appears in Collections: | | Working Papers, Levy Economics Institute of Bard College
|
| Files in This Item:
| |
|
| No. of Downloads:
| |
| last Month |
last 3 Month |
total |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| | |
Download bibliographical data as:
BibTeX
|
| |
Share on:http://hdl.handle.net/10419/31536
|
Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
|