The purpose of this report is to provide a comprehensive overview of capital movements in Europe in a global context.
Is technological progress behind growing income inequality? No, according to Zsolt Darvas, who argues that redistribution and the regulation of certain professions were more important factors.
An analysis of macroecnomic developments shows that Central and Eastern European (CEE) EU member states fared much better in the aftermath of the crisis compared to euro-area periphery countries. Furthermore, they have a better chance to avoid the problems that the euro-periphery countries faced before the crisis.
The properly measured EU-wide Gini coefficient of disposable income inequality shows that inequality in the EU as whole declined in 1994-2008, after which it remained broadly stable. However, within the EU, there are large differences in income inequality which require policy action.
This Working Paper reviews recent developments in the EU’s financial supervisory and regulatory architecture with a view to draw out lessons for regional financial regulatory architecture in Asia.
Our early econometric analysis shows that Donald Trump performed more strongly in states with higher income inequality. He also did better in states with a higher share of less-educated, older, US-born and non-Hispanic voters.
In this Working Paper, Zsolt Darvas estimates the global and regional distribution of income and calculates statistics of global and regional income inequality.
This Blueprint offers an in-depth analysis of inequalities of income and wealth in the EU, as well as their causes and consequences. How evenly are the benefits of growth distributed in our economies, and what does this mean for fairness and social mobility? How could and should policymakers react?