CIFOR-ICRAF aborda retos y oportunidades locales y, al mismo tiempo, ofrece soluciones a los problemas globales relacionados con los bosques, los paisajes, las personas y el planeta.

Aportamos evidencia empírica y soluciones prácticas para transformar el uso de la tierra y la producción de alimentos: conservando y restaurando ecosistemas, respondiendo a las crisis globales del clima, la malnutrición, la pérdida de biodiversidad y la desertificación. En resumen, mejorando la vida de las personas.

CIFOR-ICRAF produce cada año más de 750 publicaciones sobre agroforestería, bosques y cambio climático, restauración de paisajes, derechos, políticas forestales y mucho más, y en varios idiomas. .

CIFOR-ICRAF aborda retos y oportunidades locales y, al mismo tiempo, ofrece soluciones a los problemas globales relacionados con los bosques, los paisajes, las personas y el planeta.

Aportamos evidencia empírica y soluciones prácticas para transformar el uso de la tierra y la producción de alimentos: conservando y restaurando ecosistemas, respondiendo a las crisis globales del clima, la malnutrición, la pérdida de biodiversidad y la desertificación. En resumen, mejorando la vida de las personas.

CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

Does income inequality influence subjective wellbeing? Evidence from 21 developing countries

Exportar la cita

Does income inequality matter for subjective wellbeing? Using data from 5945 individuals residing in 182 villages in rural areas of 21 developing countries, we test the relative importance of income inequality measured at different levels (country and village) in subjective wellbeing. Country-level inequality might increase subjective wellbeing because it signals potential upward mobility, whereas village-level inequality might exacerbate negative effects of local peer-group comparisons on subjective wellbeing. The two measures of income inequality are not correlated, supporting the intuition that these variables might capture different aspects of income inequality. Although we observe broad patterns that suggest inequality measured at different levels might have associations with subjective wellbeing, and with potentially differing signs, the low magnitude of these associations and their weak statistical significance do not provide enough evidence to support the argument that the level at which income inequality is measured explains overall patterns of subjective wellbeing. Our results therefore leave open for future research the question of what underlying forces might account for these observed patterns.

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-018-9992-0
Puntuación Altmetric:
Dimensiones Recuento de citas:

    Año de publicación

    2019

    Autores

    Reyes-García, V.; Angelsen, A.; Shively, G.; Minkin, D.

    Idioma

    English

    Palabras clave

    income, livelihoods

    Geográfico

    Ethiopia, Nigeria, Uganda, Bangladesh, Zambia, Cameroon, Ghana, Burkina Faso, Senegal, Malawi, Indonesia, China, Cambodia, Bolivia, Mozambique, Nepal, Guatemala, Brazil, Viet Nam, India, Democratic Republic of the Congo

Publicaciones relacionadas