Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr.

4/2010

MSURAREA IMPACTULUI
REDISTRIBUIRII ASUPRA
INEGALITII I POLARIZRII
VENITURILOR POPULAIEI

MEASURING THE IMPACT OF

REDISTRIBUTION ON INCOME
INEQUALITY AND POLARIZATION

Maria Molnar
profesor universitar doctor, cercettor
tiinific I
Institutul de Economie Naional
Academia Romn

Maria Molnar
Professor, PhD, senior researcher
Institute of National Economy Romanian
Academy
ABSTRACT
The redistribution, i.e. social transfers
(benefits), taxes and social contributions, has an
important contribution in reducing income
inequality and polarization, the tax-benefit system
being the main instrument of the income policy. The
paper presents the results of an evaluation of the
impact of income redistribution on households
income inequality and polarization in Romania
during 1995 to 2008 years. In the first part of the
paper the main methodological issues of the
measurement are being reviewed. According to the
results of the measurement, which are dealt with in
the second section, the redistribution had an
increasing lessening effect on the extent of
inequality and polarization. The social transfers,
especially pensions, were the main equalising
component of the redistribution over the entire
period.
Keywords: income distribution, social
transfers, taxes, inequality indices, polarization
indices

REZUMAT
Redistribuia, prin transferuri (prestaii)
sociale, impozite i contribuii sociale, are o
contribuie major la diminuarea inegalitii i
polarizrii veniturilor, sistemul de impozite i prestaii
sociale fiind principalul instrument al politicii
veniturilor. Articolul prezint rezultatele unei evaluri
a impactului redistribuirii veniturilor asupra
inegalitii i polarizrii veniturilor gospodriilor din
Romnia n perioada 1995-2008. n prima parte sunt
trecute n revist principalele aspecte metodologice.
Conform rezultatelor msurrii, care fac obiectul
celei de-a doua pri a articolului, impactul egalizator
al redistribuirii a crescut, iar cea mai important
contribuie la diminuarea inegalitii i polarizrii
veniturilor au avut-o transferurile sociale, n special
pensiile, de-a lungul ntregii perioade.
Cuvinte cheie: distribuia veniturilor,
transferuri sociale, impozite, indicatorii inegalitii,
indicatorii polarizrii

Introduction

Introducere

The income distribution in Romania

is marked by the generally low level and
the high inequality, according European
standards. Romania is one of the European
Union Member States with the lowest
income and the highest inequality. It
experienced a significant increase in
inequality during the transition to the
market economy, especially during the first
years of the transition, as well since 2000
year along with a great and sustained
economic growth.
The income inequality in Romania
is perceived as very high and unfair by
most people because of the deep gaps
between the living conditions of the greater

Distribuia veniturilor din Romnia

este marcat de nivelul general sczut i de
gradul relativ nalt de inegalitate, conform
standardelor europene. Romnia este unul
dintre statele membre ale Uniunii Europene
cu cele mai sczute i mai inegale venituri.
Inegalitatea veniturilor a nregistrat o cretere
semnificativ n perioada de tranziie la
economia de pia, att n prima parte a
tranziiei, n condiiile unui puternic declin
economic, ct i dup anul 2000, n condiiile
unei creteri economice susinute.
Inegalitatea este perceput ca foarte
nalt i nedreapt de majoritatea populaiei,
din cauza decalajelor mari dintre condiiile
de via ale celei mai mari pri a populaiei

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

part of population and the visibly luxurious

life of the rich. The common believe that
the income and wealth distribution is unjust
derives also from the notorious fact that
many of the very high incomes and wealth
come from activities or from capital gained
in the shadow economy, from breaking the
law or taking advantage of law
weaknesses, and from corruption. The fast
growth of the income earned by some
people, while a lot of poor lack the
opportunities and possibilities/capabilities
to have a good employment, if any, is also
disturbing. The income distribution is
characterized also by large differences
between the incomes earned by employers,
employees or some independents and those
earned by farmers or received by
unemployed and most of retired people,
between the income of households in urban
and rural areas. Some of these differences
are widening. This has led to the idea that
there is a process of social polarization,
suggested also by the fact that some
population
categories
traditionally
belonging to the middle class (teachers,
doctors, civil servants, etc.) have relatively
low wage earnings.
There are some of many reasons
why it is important to promote social and
economic policies meant to improve the
current distribution and to prevent the
further increase in social inequality and
polarization. Increasing inequality is a
matter of concern for policy makers and
scholars all around the world, as well as for
international institutions, even if there are
points of view according to which the
increase in inequality is unavoidable, effect
of the present-days technological progress,
or it is seen as a factor of economic growth
due to its motivating potential. However, as
G.A. Cornia emphasized, ignoring high and
rising inequality may entail large
economic, social and political costs (4).
One of the main mechanisms the
economic and social policy is handling in
order to get a less unequal income
distribution is the redistribution, by taxes

i viaa n condiii de lux a celor bogai.

Prerea larg rspndit c distribuia
veniturilor i a bogiei este nedreapt deriv
i din faptul binecunoscut c multe dintre
veniturile i averile mari provin din activiti
sau din capital acumulat n economia
subteran, prin nclcarea legii sau prin
exploatarea slbiciunii sistemului juridic,
precum i din fapte de corupie. Creterea
mare a veniturilor realizate de unele categorii
de populaie, n timp ce muli sraci nu au
nici
oportunitatea
i
nici
posibilitatea/capacitatea de a obine un loc de
munc, cu att mai puin a unuia care s
permit realizarea de venituri decente, este
perceput, de asemenea, ca nedreapt.
Distribuia veniturilor este caracterizat i
prin diferenele mari dintre veniturile
patronilor, salariailor i ale unora dintre
lucrtorii independeni, pe de o parte, i cele
ale agricultorilor, omerilor i ale majoritii
pensionarilor, pe de alt parte, ntre veniturile
din mediul urban i din mediul rural, din
Bucureti i celelalte regiuni, iar unele dintre
aceste decalaje se adncesc. Toate acestea au
condus la ideea c are loc i un process de
polarizare social, sugerat i de faptul c
unele categorii de populaie, care n mod
tradiional fac parte din clasa de mijloc
(profesori, medici, funcionari publici etc.),
au ctiguri salariale relativ sczute.
Sunt cteva dintre numeroasele
motive pentru care este important
promovarea unor politici economice i
sociale menite s mbunteasc actuala
distribuie a veniturilor i s previn creterea
n continuare a inegalitii i polarizrii.
Creterea inegalitii constituie un subiect de
interes pentru decidenii din politica social
i economic i pentru cercettori din
ntreaga lume, precum i pentru instituiile
internaionale, chiar dac exist i puncte de
vedere conform crora creterea inegalitii
este inevitabil, un effect al progresului
tehnologic actual, sau este vzut chiar ca un
factor al creterii economice, datorit
potenialului su motivaional. Aa cum
subliniaz ns G.A. Cornia, ignorarea
inegalitii nalte i n cretere poate avea

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

costuri economice, sociale i politice mari

(4).
Unul dintre principalele mecanisme
pe care politica economic i social le poate
utiliza pentru a reduce inegalitatea este
redistribuirea veniturilor prin impozite i
contribuii sociale i prin transferuri
(prestaii) sociale. Amploarea redistribuirii i
arhitectura sistemului fiscal i de protecie
social sunt factori importani ai inegalitii
i polarizrii veniturilor. Redistribuirea
presupune ns mobilizarea unui volum mare
de de resurse i poate avea un impact negativ
asupra eficienei economice, poate afecta
competitivitatea i oferta de for de munc.
Este un domeniu n care decidenii politici se
confrunt cu nevoia asigurrii echilibrului
dintre echitate i eficien, astfel nct
evaluarea impactului redistribuirii asupra
inegalitii i polarizrii constituie un
important reper n elaborarea unor politici
fiscale i de protecie social eficiente.
O astfel de evaluare privind influena
redistribuirii asupra inegalitii i polarizrii
veniturilor gospodriilor din Romnia
formeaz obiectul articolului. n prima parte
a articolului sunt trecute n revist
principalele aspecte metodologice referitoare
la aceast evaluare, iar n partea a doua sunt
prezentate rezultatele evalurii impactului
redistribuirii asupra inegalitii verticale i a
inegalitii intergrupe, asupra bipolarizrii i
a polarizrii veniturilor pe subpopulaii. La
nceputul celei de-a doua pri sunt
prezentate succint i cteva informaii
referitoare la evoluia nivelului veniturilor n
perioada cuprins ntre anii 1995 i 2008 i la
rezultatele estimrii indicatorilor inegalitii
i polarizrii utilizai n evaluare.

and social transfers/benefits. The extent of

the redistribution and the architecture of
tax-benefits
systems
are
important
determinants of income inequality and
polarization. However the redistribution
entails the mobilization of large resources
and may have a negative impact on
economic efficiency, by affecting the
competitiveness and the supply of labour
force. It is an area in which the policy
makers are dealing with the tradeoff
between equity and efficiency, so the
evaluation of the impact of redistribution
on inequality and polarization is an
important reference point in setting up
effective fiscal and social protection
policies.
Such an assessment concerning the
influence the redistribution has in reducing
income inequality and polarization of the
households income in Romania is the
subject of my paper. After reviewing the
methodological issues of this assessment,
the result of the evaluation of the impact on
overall and between-group inequality, and
on bipolarization and polarization by subpopulation are being presented. Some
information on the income dynamics
during the 1995 to 2008 years and the
results of the estimation of the inequality
and polarization indices used in the
evaluation are to be found at the beginning
of the second part of the paper.
1. Methodological issues
The main methodological issues
one has to deal with in measuring the
impact of income redistribution on
inequality and polarization relate to the
income concepts and their estimation, the
inequality and polarization indices, and the
method of estimating the inequality and
polarization lessening effect of the
distribution and of its components.

1. Aspecte metodologice
Principalele
aspecte
de
ordin
matodologic ale msurrii impactului
redistribuirii asupra inegalitii i polarizrii
se refer la categoriile de venituri i la
estimarea acestora, la indicatorii inegalitii
i ai polarizrii i la metoda de estimare a
efectului redistribuirii i componentelor sale.

1.1. The income concept

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

1.1. Veniturile: concept, coninut,

estimare
Evaluarea impactului redistribuirii are
la baz estimarea indicatorilor inegalitii i
polarizrii pentru patru concepte/categorii
de venituri, diferite din punct de vedere al
coninutului: veniturile brute totale nainte
de transferurile sociale (inclusiv pensiile),
veniturile
brute
totale
nainte
de
transferurile sociale (exclusiv pensiile),
veniturile brute totale (dup transferurile
sociale) i veniturile disponibile (nete).
Primul concept se refer n principal la
veniturile bneti din munc (ctiguri
salariale
i
venituri
din
activiti
independente) i din proprietate, venituri
bneti din transferuri ntre gospodrii i
venituri n natur, n principal valoarea
consumului de produse alimentare din
producia gospodriei, din transferuri ntre
gospodrii sau primite ca plat pentru munca
n alte gospodrii. Al doilea concept include
i pensiile, iar al treilea toate transferurile
sociale, cuprinznd veniturile realizate de
gospodrii din toate sursele. Veniturile
disponibile sunt veniturile care rmn
gospodriilor dup plata impozitelor i
contribuiilor sociale, venituri care sunt
utilizate pentru consum i economisire. n
general, msurarea inegalitii i polarizrii
se bazeaz pe veniturile disponibile ale
gospodriilor, ntruct acestea constituie cel
mai bun estimator prin venituri al bunstrii
unei gospodrii.
n vederea asigurrii comparabilitii
veniturilor ntre gospodrii diferite sub
aspectul
componenei,
n
evaluarea
inegalitii i polarizrii am utilizat veniturile
gospodriilor estimate pe adult echivalent, cu
ajutorul unei scale de echivalen utilizate n
msurarea srciei absolute n Romnia.
Conform acesteia, numrul de uniti adult
echivalent al unei gospodrii (AE) este
,
determinat pe baza relaiei
unde A i C reprezint numrul de persoane
adulte i, respectiv, de copii din fiecare

To assess the impact of the

redistribution I estimated inequality and
polarization indices for four income
concepts: the total gross income before
social transfers (pensions included in social
transfers), the total gross income before
social transfers (pensions excluded from
social transfers), the total gross income and
the disposable income. The first concept
refers to the market money incomes (wage
earnings, income from self employment
and income from property), money
incomes from private transfers, and
incomes in kind, mainly the value of the
consumption from own agricultural
production, from private transfers in kind
or from payment in kind for work in other
households production. The second
includes the pensions and the third all
social transfers (benefits). Disposable
income denotes the incomes that remain to
the household after the payment of taxes
and social contributions, which are the
incomes the households can use for
consumption and saving. It is the income
concept used in the measurement of
income inequality and polarization, as it is
the best income proxy of the household
welfare.
In evaluating the inequality and
polarization I used households equalized
income. The households incomes have
been equalized by using an equivalence
scale applied in the measurement of
absolute poverty in Romania. The number
of adult equivalent units of a household
(AE) is determined according to the
formula
, where A and C
symbolize the number of adult persons and
children in the household composition, and
whose parameters, = 0.5 and = 0.9,
have been estimated on the basis of
households consumption expenditure (17).
The income has been estimated for each
household based on information collected
by the household budget surveys. To
observe the evolution of the income
inequality and polarization during a long

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

10

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

period the statistical information provided

by two household surveys have to be used,
namely the Households Integrated Survey
(HIS) and the Households Budget Survey
(HBS), conducted by the National Institute
of Statistics (NIS) during 1995-2000 and
since 2001, respectively. The income
module of two surveys wasnt modified, so
the estimates of inequality indicators are
comparable since 1995 year. This makes
possible to observe the inequality and
polarization under different economic
circumstances.
Unfortunately,
no
comparable data on the households
income before 1995 are available, so that
an analysis of the inequality and
polarization throughout the period of
transition to the market economy cannot be
made. A family budget survey has been
conducted yearly by NIS before 1995 year
too, but due to methodological differences,
one can hardly estimate comparable
i inequality and polarization indices for the
entire transition period.

gospodrie. Parametrii, = 0,5 i = 0,9,

au fost estimai pe baza cheltuielilor de
consum ale gospodriilor (17).
Veniturile gospodriilor au fost
estimate pe baza informaiilor colectate prin
anchete privind bugetele de familie: Ancheta
integrat n gospodrii (AIG) i Ancheta
bugetelor de familie (ABF), realizate anual
de Institutul Naional de Statistic (INS) n
perioada 1995-2000 i, respectiv, ncepnd
cu anul 2001. Modulul referitor la venituri nu
a fost modificat de la o anchet la cealalt,
astfel nct permite realizarea de estimaii ale
indicatorilor inegalitii i polarizrii n
condiii de comparabilitate ncepnd cu anul
1995 i observarea evoluiei acestor dou
caracteristici ale distribuiei veniturilor de-a
lungul unei perioade mai mari, n condiii
diferite din punct de vedere al evoluiei
economiei naionale.
1.2.
polarizrii

Indicatorii

inegalitii

Msurarea impactului redistribuirii

asupra inegalitii i polarizrii veniturilor se
bazeaz pe estimarea, pentru fiecare din cele
patru categorii de venituri, a coeficientului
Gini (unul pentru inegalitatea vertical i
ase pentru inegalitatea intergrupe), a
indicelui Foster-Wolfson al bipolarizrii i a
ase indici Esteban-Ray ai polarizrii pe
subpopulaii.
Coeficientul Gini este cel mai
frecvent utilizat dintre indicatorii inegalitii.
El este o msur a distanei medii dintre
veniturile individuale i este estimat pe baza
relaiei:
(1)

1.2.
The
polarization indices

inequality

and

The measurement of the impact of

redistribution on income inequality and
polarization is based on Gini coefficients
(one estimated for the overall inequality,
and other for between group inequality),
the Foster-Wolfson index of bipolarization
and the Esteban-Ray index of polarization
by sub-population.
The Gini coefficient is the most
frequently used inequality index. It is a
measure of the mean distance between the
individual incomes, and it is estimated by:
(1)

unde Dx este diferena medie dintre fiecare

venit xi i fiecare venit xj,
este venitul
mediu i n este numrul populaiei. Indicele
arat un grad mai nalt de inegalitate la valori
mai mari ale acestuia. Limita sa inferioar
este zero, indicnd egalitatea perfect. Limita

where Dx is the average difference between

each income xi and each income xj, is the
mean income and n is the population. The
index is showing a higher degree of
inequality as its value increases. The

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

11

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

superioar este egal cu 1 (100%, dac este

exprimat n procente), corespunznd
inegalitii perfecte: o singur persoan
dispune de toate veniturile, ceilali membri ai
societii fiind lipsii de venituri.
Coeficientul
Gini
intergrupe
msoar diferena medie dintre veniturile
medii ale gospodriilor grupate dup diferite
caracteristici
sociale, demografice i
economice ( i ), ponderate cu populaia
celor m groupe, mai precis cu ponderea
fiecrei grupe n populaia total ( and ):

lowest limit of the index range is zero,

corresponding to a perfectly equal income
distribution. The highest limit is 1 (100%,
if expressed in percentages) and denote a
perfectly unequal distribution: a single
individual/household has all income, others
have no income.
The
between
group
Gini
coefficient is measuring the mean
difference between the average incomes of
households
grouped
by
social,
demographic and economic characteristics
( and ), weighted by the population
(2) shares of the m groups ( and ):
(2)

Indicele Foster-Wolfson, utilizat n

msurarea bipolarizrii, are urmtoarea
The Foster-Wolfson index, used to
form:
measure bipolarization, has the following
form:
, (3)

where L(0.5) represents the income share

of the population whose income is lower
than the median (the poor half of the
, (3)
population), G is the Gini coefficient,
and Me are the mean and the median of the
unde L(0.5) reprezint ponderea veniturilor distribution. The index ranges within the
de care dispune populaia ale crei venituri interval [0, 1], being equal to 0, in case of a
sunt mai mici dect mediana (jumtatea perfectly equal distribution (all the incomes
srac a populaiei) n totalul veniturilor, G are equal), and equal to 1, for a perfect
este coeficientul Gini, i Me sunt media i bimodal distribution, where half of the
mediana distribuiei veniturilor. Indicele population has no income, and each
variaz n intervalul [0, 1], fiind egal cu 0, n member of the other half have income
cazul n care toate veniturile sunt egale, i equal to twice the mean income.
The Esteban-Ray index, the first
egal cu 1, pentru o distribuie bimodal
polarization
index developed in the
perfect, n care jumtate din populaie nu
dispune de venituri, iar fiecare membru al alienation-identification framework, has
celeilalte jumti dispune de un venit egal cu the form
dublul mediei.
Indicele
Esteban-Ray,
primul
indicator al polarizrii propus n cadrul
(4)
abordrii fundamentate pe relaia alienarein
which
the
function
of
alienation
is
the
identificare, are forma
difference between the logarithms of the
income of the population of groups i and j
(in fact, there are logarithms of the average
income in each group, on the assumption
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

12

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

that all incomes in the group are equal to

the average), and the function of
identification is , where pi represents the
(4)
n care funcia de alienare este reprezentat
de diferena dintre logaritmul veniturilor
populaiei din grupele i i j (de fapt,
logaritmul veniturilor medii ale populaiei
din fiecare grup, n ipoteza c toate
veniturile din grup sunt egale cu media), iar
funcia de identificare este
, unde pi
reprezint ponderea populaiei din grupa i n
totalul populaiei. este un parametru care
exprim aversiunea/densibilitatea fa de
polarizare, cu intervalul de variaie ntre 1 i
1,6. i indicele Esteban-Ray variaz n
intervalul [0, 1].
1.3. O modalitate de evaluare a
impactului redistribuirii
Cea mai cunoscut i cea mai simpl
metod de msurare a
impactului
redistribuirii, aplicat i n analiza srciei, se
bazeaz pe diferena dintre indicatorii
inegalitii i polarizrii estimai pentru
veniturile gospodriilor nainte i dup
redistribuire. Efectul total absolut al
redistribuirii este estimat ca diferen ntre
indicatorii
inegalitii
i
polarizrii
veniturilor disponibile (IVD) i cei ai
veniturilor brute totale fr transferuri
sociale, inclusiv pensile (IVBT-TS), adic
diferena dintre inegalitatea i polarizarea
veniturilor de care dispun gospodriile i cele
ale veniturilor de care ar dispune n situaia
ipotetic a absenei redistribuirii1:
(5)
EA_R = IVD IVBT-TS
Contribuia transferurilor sociale este
estimat prin diferena dintre indicatorii
inegalitii i polarizrii veniturilor brute
totale (IVBT) i cei ai veniturilor totale brute
nainte de transferurile sociale, inclusiv
pensiile (IVBT-TS):
EA_TS = IVBT IVBT-TS.
(6)

population share of the group i. is a

parameter expressing the aversion/
sensitivity to polarization, with the range of
variation
[1, 1.6]. The index ranges
within the interval [0, 1] also.
1.3. A way to evaluate the impact
of redistribution
The most common and simplest
method to measure the inequality and
polarization impact of the income
redistribution is based on the differences
between the inequality and polarization
indices estimated for different income
concepts. The total absolute effect of the
redistribution is estimated by the difference
between the inequality and polarization
indices of disposable income (IDI) and
those of total gross income before social
transfers (pensions included in social
transfers) (ITGI-ST), that is the difference
between the inequality and polarization of
the income the household disposes and that
of income it would dispose in the
hypothetical situation of the absence of the
redistribution2:
AE_R = IDI - ITGI-ST.
(5)
The contribution of social transfers
is estimated by the difference between the
inequality and polarization indices of total
gross income (ITGI) and those of total gross
income before social transfers, pensions
being included in social transfers (ITGI-ST):
AE_ST = ITGI ITGI-ST. (6)
The difference between the indices
calculated for the total gross income before
social transfers, pensions being excluded
from and included in transfers (ITGI-(ST-P)
and ITGI-ST, respectively), is used as a
measure of the pensions contribution, while
the difference between the indices
calculated for total gross income and for

Desigur, dac nu ar exista sistemul de redistribuire, impactul asupra inegalitii i polarizrii ar fi diferit,
ntruct aceasta ar determina o modificare a comportamentului economic, social i demographic al gospodriilor.

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

13

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

Diferena dintre indicatorii calculai

pentru veniturile brute totale nainte de
transferurile sociale, exclusiv i inclusiv
pensiile (IVBT-(TS-P) i, respective, IVBT-TS),
msoar contribuia pensiilor, iar diferena
dintre indicatorii calculai pentru veniturile
brute totale i pentru veniturile brute totale
nainte de transferurile sociale, exclusiv
pensiile, msoar contribuia celorlalte
transferuri sociale (prestaii familiale, de
omaj, de asisten social i alte prestaii):
EA_P = IVBT-(TS-P) IVBT-TS; (7)
EA_ATS= IVBT IVBT-(TS-P). (8)
n fine, efectul plilor effectuate de
gospodrii pentru impozite i contribuii
sociale este evaluat prin diferena dintre
indicatorii calculai pentru veniturile
disponibile i veniturile brute totale:
EA_I&CS = IVD IVBT.

2. Rezultate
i

2. Results

(9)

Msura relativ a efectului egalizator

al redistribuirii o reprezint raportul dintre
efectul absolut al acesteia i indicatorii
inegalitii i polarizrii veniturilor brute
totale nainte de transferurile sociale,
inclusiv pensiile.

2.1. Inegalitatea
veniturilor n Romnia

total gross income before social transfers,

pensions being excluded from transfers,
measures the impact of the others social
transfers (family, unemployment, social
assistance and other benefits):
AE_P = ITGI-(ST-P) ITGI-ST; (7)
AE_OST = ITGI ITGI-(ST-P).
(8)
Finally, the effect of taxes and
social contributions is evaluated by the
difference between the indices estimated
for the disposable income and for the total
gross income:
(9)
AE_T&SC = IDI - ITGI.
The relative measure of the
narrowing effect of the redistribution is
expressed by the ratio of the absolute
effects of the redistribution to the
inequality and polarization indices of total
gross income, before social transfers,
including pensions.

polarizarea

n studiul consacrat msurrii

inegalitii i polarizrii indicatorii au fost
estimai pentru anii 1995, 2000, 2006, 2007
i 2008, care acoper o perioad marcat de o
diminuare sever a veniturilor populaiei,
urmat o cretere puternic a acestora. n
condiiile unui puternic declin economic i
ale inflaiei nalte, veniturile disponibile
medii reale ale gospodriilor, estimate pe
adult echivalent, au fost cu 25% mai mici n

2.1. Income inequality

polarization in Romania

and

To observe changes in income

inequality in the period 1995-2008, I
estimated the inequality indices for five
years: 1995, 2000, 2006, 2007 and 2008. It
is a period marked by a severe decline,
followed by a strong increase of
households income. Due to the economic
downward and the high inflation that
occurred in the second half of the 1990
years, the mean equalized disposable
income of Romanian households was by
25% lower in 2000 compared to 1995 year,
making worse the living standard already
low during the command economy and
further decreased in the first years of the
transition to the market economy. The
decrease of the mean income was driven by
falling of wage earnings and state
insurance pensions (by 11% and 18%,
respectively), and by the drop of the

Of course, whether the redistribution system would really miss, the impact on inequality would be different,
since that would entail a radical change in economic social and demographic behavior of household.
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

14

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

2000 dect n 1995, scderea fiind

determinat de scderea nivelului real al
salariilor i pensiilor (cu 11% i respectiv,
18%), de scderea efectivului salariailor (de
la 6,2 la 4,6 milioane) i creterea numrului
de pensionari (de la 5,2 la 6,2 milioane) i de
persoane ocupate n agricultur, n special n
agricultura de subzisten, precum i de
persistena unui nivel nalt al omajului (n
jurul unui milion de omeri).
ncepnd cu anul 2001, veniturile au
crescut an de an, astfel nct n 2008
veniturile medii erau de dou ori mai mari
dect n 2000. n perioada 2001-2008, ritmul
mediu anual de cretere a veniturilor
disponibile medii a fost de 9%, ns n 2007
i 2008 rata de cretere a fost mult mai mare:
13% i, respectiv, 18%. n 2008, ctigurile
salariale, pensiile de asigurri sociale de stat
i pentru agricultori au fost, n medie, de
peste dou ori, de 2,5 ori i, respectiv, de
cinci ori mai mari dect n 2000.
Pe fondul acestei evoluii a nivelului
veniturilor, a crescut i inegalitatea i
polarizarea acestora: toi indicatorii atest
faptul c n anii 2006-2008 distribuia
veniturilor era mai inegal i mai polarizat
dect n 1995 i 2000. Creterea inegalitii i
a polarizrii a fost mai accentuat ntre 2000
i 2006, dup care acestea au nregistrat o
scdere semnificativ n 2007 i 2008. n
ceea ce privete perioada cuprins ntre 1995
i 2000, indicatorii arat o cretere a
polarizrii i a inegalitii intergrupe, ns
coeficientul Gini sugereaz c inegalitatea
vertical nu s-a modificat.

number of wage earners (from 6.2 million

in 1995 to 4.6 million in 2000, along with
the increase of pensioners (from 5.2 to 6.2
million), of people employed in
agriculture, mainly in the subsistence one,
and by the persistence of high
unemployment
(one
million
of
unemployed).
Since 2001 the income increased
year by year, so that in 2008 the mean
income was twice that of the 2000 years.
During 2001-2008 the average annual
growth rate of the households disposable
income was of 9%, but in 2007 and 2008
the income increased more: by 13% and
18%, respectively. In 2008, the average
wage earnings, state insurance pensions
and farmer pensions were over two, two
and a half and five times, respectively,
higher than in 2000.
Along with that dynamic evolution of the
income, the income inequality and
polarization increased also: all indices are
showing a more unequal and polarized
income distribution in 2006-2008 years
compared to 1995 and 2000. The increase
in inequality and polarization was larger
between 2000 and 2006 years, and then a
significant decrease came about in 2007
and 2008. As for the period between 1995
and 2000 years, there was an increase in
polarization and in between group
inequality, while the Gini coefficients are
showing no change in the overall inequality

Tabelul 1. Indicatorii inegalitii i polarizrii veniturilor n Romnia

1995

2000

2006

2007

2008

Inegalitatea vertical: coeficientul Gini

0,296

0,296

0,328

0,320

0,308

Inegalitatea intergrupe: coeficientul Gini dup

Statutul ocupaional al capului gospodriei
Prezena/absena cel puin unui salariat/patron

0,078
0,057

0,107
0,083

0,119
0,096

0,130
0,103

0,108
0,083

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

15

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010
Nivelul de educaie a capului gospodriei
Tipul de gospodrie
Mediul de reziden
Regiunea

0,113
0,095
0,053
0,054

0,127
0,097
0,062
0,049

0,173
0,103
0,098
0,068

0,178
0,104
0,100
0,071

0,168
0,101
0,100
0,071

Bipolarizarea: indicele Foster-Wolfson

Polarizarea pe subpopulaii:
indicele Esteban-Ray ( = 1) dup
Statutul ocupaional al capului gospodriei
Prezena/absena cel puin unui salariat/patron
Nivelul de educaie a capului gospodriei
Tipul de gospodrie
Mediul de reziden
Regiunea
Sursa: Estimaii pe baza datelor INS AIG i ABF

0,231

0,243

0,266

0,261

0,253

0,048
0,060
0,038
0,026
0,054
0,014

0,060
0,086
0,042
0,027
0,063
0,013

0,070
0,101
0,057
0,028
0,102
0,016

0,078
0,111
0,060
0,030
0,103
0,016

0,06
0,088
0,056
0,029
0,104
0,017

Table 1. Income inequality and polarization indices in Romania

1995

2000

2006

2007

2008

0.296

0.296

0.328

0.320

0.308

0.078
0.057
0.113
0.095
0.053
0.054

0.107
0.083
0.127
0.097
0.062
0.049

0.119
0.096
0.173
0.103
0.098
0.068

0.130
0.103
0.178
0.104
0.100
0.071

0.108
0.083
0.168
0.101
0.100
0.071

Bipolarization: Foster-Wolfson index

0.231
Polarization by sub-population :
Esteban-Ray index ( = 1) by
Occupation of household head
0.048
Households with/without at least one
wage earner/employer
0.060
Education of household head
0.038
Household type
0.026
Residence area (urban/rural)
0.054
Region:
0.014
Source: Estimates based on NIS HIS and HBS

0.243

0.266

0.261

0.253

0.060

0.070

0.078

0.065

0.086
0.042
0.027
0.063
0.013

0.101
0.057
0.028
0.102
0.016

0.111
0.060
0.030
0.103
0.016

0.088
0.056
0.029
0.104
0.017

Overall inequality: Gini coefficient

Between groups inequality:
Gini coefficients by
Occupation of household head
Household with/without employees
Education level of household head
Household type
Urban/rural areas
Region

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

16

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

2.2. Impactul redistribuirii

2.2. The impact of the

redistribution

Estimaiile coeficienilor Gini i ale

indicilor Foster-Wolfson pentru diferitele
categorii de venituri evideniaz diferene
mari
i
n
cretere
ntre
inegalitatea/polarizarea veniturilor nainte i
dup redistribuire, adic nainte i dup
intrarea prestaiilor sociale n bugetul
gospodriilor i plata impozitelor i a
contribuiilor sociale.
n anul 2008, coeficientul Gini al
inegalitii veniturilor brute totale, nainte
de transferurile sociale era de 0,465, iar cel
al veniturilor disponibile de 0,308, astfel
nct se poate presupune c redistribuirea a
condus la diminuarea inegalitii cu 34%.
Cea mai mare parte a efectului total al
redistribuirii
reprezint
contribuia
transferurilor sociale (80%, din care 67%
reprezint contribuia pensiilor i 13%
contribuia celorlalte transferuri sociale).

The estimates of Gini coefficients

and Foster-Wolfson indices for different
income concepts reveal large and growing
differences between the inequality and
polarization before and after redistribution,
i.e. before and after the receipt of social
transfers and the payment of taxes and
contributions to social protection schemes.
In 2008, the Gini coefficient of the
gross income before social transfers was of
0.465 and that of the disposable income
(the net income after social transfers) was
of 0.308. Thus one can suppose that the
redistribution led to a lessening of income
inequality by 34%. Most of the total effect
of redistribution was due to social transfers
(80%, out of which 67% to pensions and
13% to the others social benefits).

Figura 1
Reducerea absolut a inegalitii i polarizrii sub impactul redistribuirii
0,400
0,300
0,200
0,296

0,296

-0,088

-0,097

0,328

0,320

0,308

-0,117

-0,118

-0,126

-0,031

-0,033

-0,031

2006

2007

2008

0,100

Inegalitatea
veniturilor
disponibile
(coeficientul
Gini)
Impactul
fiscalitii

0,000
-0,100

-0,019

-0,022

-0,200
1995

2000

Impactul
transferurilor
sociale

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

17

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

Polarizarea
veniturilor
disponibile
(indicele FosterWolfson)
Impactul
fiscalitii

0,300
0,200
0,100

0,231

0,243

-0,108

-0,122

-0,026

-0,019

0,266

0,261

0,253

-0,170

-0,167

-0,174

-0,038

-0,042

-0,037

2006

2007

2008

0,000
-0,100
-0,200

Impactul
transferurilor
sociale

-0,300
1995

2000

Sursa: Estimaii pe baza datelor INS AIG i ABF

Figure 1
The lessening effect of redistribution on income inequality and polarization
0,400
Inequality of
disposable
income (Gini
coefficients)

0,300
0,200
0,296

0,296

0,328

0,320

0,308

Effect of taxes
and social
contributions

-0,088

-0,097

-0,117

-0,118

-0,126

-0,019

-0,022

-0,031

Effect of social
transfers

-0,033

-0,031

1995

2000

2006

2007

2008

0,100
0,000
-0,100
-0,200

0,300
0,200
0,100

0,231

0,243

0,266

0,261

0,253

Effect of taxes
and social
contributions

0,000
-0,108

-0,122

-0,026

-0,019

1995

2000

-0,100
-0,200

Polarization of
disposable
income (FosterWolfson
indices)

-0,170

-0,167

-0,174

-0,038

-0,042

-0,037

2006

2007

2008

Effect of social
transfers

-0,300

Source: Estimates based on NIS HIS and HBS

Efectul egalizator al redistribuirii a

The

lessening

effect

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

18

of

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

crescut de la 27% n 1995 la 31% n 2006 i

34% n 2008. A crescut efectul ambelor
componente ale ale redistribuirii (prestaiile
sociale i impozitele) de-a lungul ntregii
perioade, cu excepia scderii efectului
impozitelor i contribuiilor sociale din anul
2008. Transferurile sociale, pensiile n
principal, au fost componenta cu cel mai
mare impact de-a lungul ntregii perioade.
Ponderea contribuiei lor la reducerea
inegalitii a sczut ns uor, de la 82% n
1995 la 78% n 2007 (i 80% n 2008), dei
ponderea prestaiilor sociale n veniturile
populaiei a crescut. A crescut ns ponderea
contribuiei fiscalitii la diminuarea
inegalitii, determinat n principal de
creterea ponderii ctigurilor salariale n
veniturile gospodriilor (n condiiile n care
ctigurile salariale sunt principala surs de
impozit pe venituri i contribuii sociale) i n
mai mic msur schimbrilor n sistemul de
impozitare, cu excepia perioadei 1995-2000.
n aceast perioad a avut loc o scdere
semnificativ a ponderii ctigurilor salariale
n veniturile gospodriilor, ns aceasta a fost
nsoit de creterea ratelor contribuiilor
sociale i de instituirea impozitului progresiv.
Ponderea impactului egalizator al fiscalitii
a fost mai mare i n 2006 comparativ cu
2000, cu toate c sistemul de impozitare
bazat pe cota unic fusese instituit din 2005.
Tendina a fost legat de creterea relativ
mare a salariilor i a ponderii acestora n
veniturile gospodriilor, n condiiile n care
impactul egalizator al pensiilor s.a diminuat,
din cauza faptului c pensiile au crescut mai
puin dect salariile (Anexa 1).
Evident, redistribuirea are un impact
mai mare asupra inegalitii dintre veniturile
gospodriilor
grupate
dup
statutul
ocupaional al capului gospodriei datorit
faptului c pentru unele categorii de
gospodrii (cele de pensionari i omeri)
prestaiile sociale constituie o important,
dac nu principala, surs de venit, iar
impozitele i contribuiile sociale sunt
suportate n principal de alte categorii de
gospodrii (cele de salariai, n special). n
2008, coeficientul Gini intergrupe estimat

redistribution on income inequality grew

during 1995-2008 period from 27% in
1995 to 31% in 2006 and to 34% in 2008.
The absolute impact of both redistribution
components (social transfers and taxes)
increased over the entire period, except for
the 2008 years decrease of tax
contribution. The social transfers, the
pensions mainly, were the leading
equalizing component of redistribution
over the entire period. The share of their
contribution to the overall lessening effect
decreased slightly from 82% in 1995 to
78% in 2007, although their share in
households income increased. There was
instead a slight increase in the share of the
taxes contribution in the attenuation of
income inequality, related mainly to the
growing share of wage earnings in
households income (given that the wage
earnings are the main source of income tax
revenue and of contributions to the social
security systems) and to a lesser extent to
changes in the tax system, except for 19952000 years. During that period a significant
decrease of wage earnings share went
along with a small increase of the
equalizing effect of taxes due to an
increase of social contributions rates and
the setting up of the progressive taxation.
The share of equalizing effect of taxes was
larger in 2006 than in 2000, albeit a flat tax
system has been set up in 2005. The
considerable increase of wages and of their
income share, as well as a loss in the
pensions equalizing power (since pensions
increased less than wages) led to this trend
(Annex 1).
Obviously, the redistribution has a
greater mitigating effect on the inequality
between the income of households grouped
by the occupation of household head, since
for some households groups social
benefits are the main income source and
the taxes and social contributions are been
paid mainly by the other households
groups. In 2008, the between-group Gini
coefficient estimated for the mean
disposable income of these households

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

19

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

pentru
veniturile
disponibile
ale
gospodriilor
grupate
dup
statutul
ocupaional a fost cu 57% mai mic dect cel
estimat pentru veniturile brute totale nainte
de transferurile sociale. Cea mai mare parte
a diferenei dintre cei doi coeficieni Gini s.a
datorat transferurilor sociale (70%), ns
ponderea
contribuiei
impozitelor
i
contribuiilor sociale a fost mai mare dect
asupra inegalitii verticale (30%, comparativ
cu 20%). Impactul redistribuirii asupra
inegalitii dintre veniturile gospodriilor
grupate n funcie de prezena n componena
lor cel puin a unui salariat sau patron i n
funcie de tipul gospodriei este, de
asemenea, mare. n schimb, inegalitatea
determinat de nivelul de educaie, ca i
inegalitatea dintre veniturile gospodriilor
grupate pe medii de reziden i pe regiuni,
este influenat n mai mic msur de
protecia social i de fiscalitate (Anexa 2).
Diferena mare i n cretere dintre
indicii Foster-Wolfson estimai pentru
veniturile disponibile/nete i veniturile brute
totale, fr transferuri sociale (veniturile
gospodriilor nainte de redistribuire),
atest o contribuie mai mare a redistribuirii
la reducerea polarizrii veniturilor dect
cea nregistrat n cazul inegalitii. n 2008,
conform
indicilor
Foster-Wolfson,
polarizarea veniturilor gospodriilor a fost cu
46% mai mic dect ar fi fost n lipsa
redistribuirii (0,253 comparativ cu 0,465), iar
diferena a crescut fa de 1995 i 2000
(37%), 2006 (44%) i 2007 (45%). Ca i n
cazul inegalitii, transferurile sociale,
pensiile n special, au avut cea mai mare
contribuie la reducerea polarizrii. n 2008,
82% din efectul redistribuirii s-a datorat
transferurilor sociale, din care 73% pensiilor
i 9% celorlalte componente ale proteciei
sociale. Aproape o cincime din reducerea
polarizrii a fost determinat de impozite i
contribuii sociale (Anexa 1).
Rezultatele estimrilor indic o
cretere a contribuiei tuturor componentelor
redistribuirii la diminuarea polarizrii n
termeni absolui, dar numai contribuia
pensiilor a crescut de-a lungul ntregii

groups was by 57% lower than that

estimated for the gross income before
social transfers. The largest part of the
difference between the two Gini
coefficients was also due to social transfers
(70%), although the effect of taxes and
social contributions was greater than on the
overall inequality (30% compared with
20%). The impact of the redistribution on
the inequality between the incomes of
households with and without at least one
wage earner/employer and between the
mean incomes of different household types
is also large, while the impact on the
inequality related to education, residence
areas and region is smaller (Annex 2).
The large and growing difference
between the Foster-Wolfson indices
estimated for the gross total income
without social transfers (the income of the
households before redistribution) and the
disposable/net
income
(after
the
redistribution) shows a large contribution
of the redistribution to achieve a lower
income polarization also. In 2008,
according to the Foster-Wolfson indices,
the level of disposable income polarization
was by 46% lower than the one which
would have been achieved in the absence
of redistribution hypothesis (0.253 and
0.465, respectively), and the difference
increased compared with 1995 and 2000
(37%), 2006 (44%) and 2007 (45%). As in
the case of inequality, the most important
contribution to mitigating the polarization
is given by the social transfers, particularly
the pensions. In 2008, 82% of the impact
of the redistribution was due to social
benefits, of which 73% to pensions and 9%
to other social benefits. Almost a fifth
(18%) of the diminishing of the
polarization derived from taxes and social
contributions (Annex 1).
The results of the estimations show
a growth of the contribution of all
components of the redistribution to the
reducing of polarization in absolute
terms, but only the contributions of
pensions have increased over the whole

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

20

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

perioade. Contribuia celorlalte transferuri

sociale a sczut n 2007 i 2008, iar
contribuia impozitelor i contribuiilor
sociale a sczut n 2000 fa de 1995 i n
2008 fa de 2007. n ceea ce privete
evoluia contribuiei acestei componente a
redistribuirii, poate prea paradoxal faptul c
a sczut n 2000, cnd a fost instituit
impozitul progresiv, i s-a dublat n 2006,
cnd cota unic de impozitare era deja
instituit. Explicaia acestei evoluii ine de
evoluia salariilor i a numrului de salariai,
precum i de gradul relativ nalt de fiscalitate
asupra salariilor. Scderea mare a numrului
de salariai i a ponderii salariilor n
veniturile gospodriilor, n perioada cuprins
ntre 1995 i 2000, a determinat scderea
impactului fiscalitii, dup cum creterea
nivelului salariilor i a ponderii ctigurilor
salariale a determinat creterea impactului
fiscalitii n 2006 i 2007 (Anexa 1).
i indicii Esteban-Ray ai polarizrii
intergrupe (pe subpopulaii) relev faptul c
redistribuirea are o contribuie mare la
atenuarea polarizrii veniturilor pe grupe de
populaie. n 2008, polarizarea veniturilor
disponibile ale gospodriilor grupate n
funcie de statutul ocupaional al capului
gospodriei, de prezena/absena cel puin
unui
salariat/patron
n
cpmponena
gospodriei i de tipul gospodriei, a fost cu
63%, 70% i, respectiv, cu 53%, mai mic
dect fi fost dac gospodriile nu ar fi
beneficiat de prestaii sociale i nu ar fi pltit
impozite i contribuii sociale. Impactul
asupra polarizrii pe grupe dup nivelul de
educaie a capului gospodriei, de mediul de
reziden i regiune este mai sczut (Anexa
2).

period. The contribution of the other social

transfers fell in 2007 and 2008 and the one
of taxes decreased in 2000 compared with
1995 and in 2008 relative to 2007.
Regarding the evolution of the latter, it
may seem paradoxical that it fell in 2000,
when the progressive income tax was set,
and doubled by 2006, when a flat tax had
already been established. The explanation
for this development is related to the
evolution of the wages and of the number
of employees and to the high tax and social
contribution rates on wages. The large
decrease of employees number and in the
share of wages in the households income
during the period between 1995 and 2000
led to the decrease of the impact of taxes
and
social
contributions
on
the
polarization, as the increase of wages and
of their share in the income have led to the
increase of the impact of taxes and social
contributions by 2006 and in 2007 (Annex
1).
The Esteban-Ray between-group
polarization indices, estimated according
to the socio-economic characteristics of the
households, also show a large contribution
of the income redistribution to alleviate the
income polarization. In 2008, the extent of
polarization was by 63%, 70% and 53%,
respectively, lower than expected under the
hypothesis of the absence of redistribution,
in the case of the households grouping
according to the occupation of the
household head, the presence of at least
one employee/employer in the household
composition and the household type, while
the impact on the income polarization
related to education, as well on the
polarization by urban/rural areas and by
region is smaller (Annex 2).

Concluzii

Concluding remarks

Distribuia
veniturilor
populaiei
din
The
income
distribution
in
Romnia este marcat de nivelul general Romania is marked by the general low
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

21

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

sczut i de gradul relativ nalt de inegalitate

i polarizare. Distribuia a devenit mai
inegal i polarizat n cursul tranziiei la
economia de pia, n perioada de accentuat
declin economic, dar i n perioada de
cretere economic, cu unele ntreruperi ale
acestei tendine legate n principal de alegeri.
La nceput inegalitatea a crescut din cauz c
cele mai multe gospodrii au suferit pierderi
de venituri generate de inflaia nalt i de
recesiunea economic, de comprimarea sau
ncetarea activitii unor mari uniti
industriale, de pierderea masiv de locuri de
munc i de scderea dramatic a efectivului
de salariai. O parte a celor disponibilizai din
industrie au intrat n omaj, iar o alt parte sau pensionat sau au devenit agricultori, n
principal n agricultura de subzisten, cu
toii avnd venituri mult mai mici dect
ctigurile salariale pierdute. Prin urmare,
distribuia veniturilor realizate de gospodrii
din ctiguri salariale a devenit din ce n ce
mai polarizat, avnd n vedere c aproape
jumtate din populaie triete n gospodrii
fr venituri din salarii. A crescut i
inegalitatea veniturilor din munc. n acelai
timp, unele gospodrii au devenit bogate sau
foarte bogate, prin mijloace corecte sau
incorecte. n cea de-a doua parte a perioadei,
n care a avut loc relansarea creterii
economice,
creterea
veniturilor
din
proprietate i a veniturilor din salarii sau din
activiti independente, n cazul unor
profesii, activiti i locuri de munc,
concomitent cu persistena unui numr mare
de de gospodrii cu venituri mici i foarte
mici, legate de lipsa calificrii i
oportunitilor de ocupare, ca i de sarcina
familial, au fost principalii factori ai
creterii inegalitii i polarizrii veniturilor.
Romnia are un sistem de protecie social
dezvoltat, care asigur prestaii sociale
menite s ofere protecie mpotriva tuturor
categoriilor de riscuri acoperite de sistemele
moderne de protecie social. Totui, n
condiiile nivelului actual de dezvoltare
economic i ale structurii ocupaionale a
populaiei, nevoile de protecie sunt foarte

income level and a relatively high and

increasing inequality and polarization. The
two characteristics of the distribution
worsened along the transition to the market
economy, during periods of economic
downturn and economic growth as well,
with some trend breaks related mainly to
elections. At the beginning the income
inequality raised because most households
suffered income losses due to high
inflation and economic recession, mainly
because of the closing down of many large
industrial units and the massive loss of
salaried jobs. A great part of those
displaced
from
industry
became
unemployed, early retired and/or farmer,
mainly in the subzistence agriculture, all of
them having much lower income compared
with their former wage earnings. As a
result, the distribution of the income from
wage earnings became more and more
polarized, since almost a half of the
population is living in households with no
wages. The incomes from work widened.
At the same time, some households became
rich or very rich, by fair or unfair means.
Then, during the years of economic
recovery, the growth of property income
and of wage earnings and income from
independent activity, related to some
professions and jobs, and the persistence of
a large proportion of households with low
and very low incomes, related to missing
qualifications
and
employment
opportunities as well as to family burden,
were the determinants of the further
increasing in inequality and polarization.
Romania has a developed social
protection system, providing social benefits
designed to provide protection against all
types of risks covered by the modern social
protection systems. However, under the
current circumstances related to the
economic
development
and
the
occupational structure of the Romanian
population, the needs for social protection
are very large and the resources that can be
allocated to this end are very limited.
Therefore the level of social benefits is low

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

22

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

mari i resursele care pot fi alocate n acest

scop sunt foarte restrnse, astfel nct nivelul
prestaiilor sociale este sczut (13, 15). Chiar
i n aceste condiii, sistemul de protecie
social, redistribuirea veniturilor n general,
are o contribuie important n reducerea
inegalitii i polarizrii veniturilor. nainte
de declanarea actualei crize economice,
inegalitatea era cu o treime mai mic dect ar
fi fost n absena redistribuirii, iar polarizarea
era la jumtatea celei estimate n ipoteza n
care redistribuirea nu ar fi avut loc. Cu toate
acestea redistribuirea nu este suficient
pentru diminuarea nivelului efectiv al
inegalitii i pentru a preveni creterea
excesiv a acesteia i accentuarea polarizrii
veniturilor. Desigur, contribuia redistribuirii
poate fi mbuntit, prin creterea nivelului
de protecie i a eficienei mecanismelor de
redistribuire, prin asigurarea resurselor
necesare, inclusiv prin colectarea mai bun a
impozitelor i contribuiilor sociale, i prin
favorizarea proteciei sociale la mprirea
roadelor creterii economice.

(13, 15). Even so the redistribution of

income has an important contribution in
levelling of income distribution, especially
by social transfers. Before the current
economic crises the inequality and
polarization were by a third and almost by
a half lower than would be without
redistribution. But to diminish the present
inequality and to prevent its excessive
increase and further polarization the
redistribution is not enough. Of course, its
contribution can improve, by raising the
level of social protection and by improving
its efficiency, as well as by providing the
necessary resources, including a better
collection of taxes and social contributions,
and by allocating more to social protection
while sharing out the fruits of economic
growth.
Policies to increase and to improve
employment,
especially
of
those
experiencing difficulties in finding jobs, to
reduce the employment on informal and
black market and to motivate participation
in work are also very important, as they
can contribute to dwindle the population
with low income. A proper remuneration of
teachers, doctors and other medical staff,
of civil servants and highly skilled experts,
which are working in public institutions,
and policies aimed at supporting the liberal
professions can contribute to the formation
and the strengthening of the middle class
and to the decrease of the income
polarization. The development of the
agriculture, of the rural economy in
general, as well as the regional
development, is crucial for poverty
alleviation and reducing inequality, while
improving education and training, and
providing equal opportunities to education
is a factor that can contribute to reducing
inequality and polarization in the long
term.

Politicile de reducere a inegalitii i

polarizrii trec ns dincolo de redistribuirea
veniturilor. Este necesar promovarea unor
politici orientate spre creterea ocuprii
populaiei n vrst de munc, n special a
celei care ntmpin dificulti n gsirea
unui loc de munc, spre mbuntirea
structurii ocuprii, reducerea ocuprii n
economia informal, n special a ocuprii la
negru, i spre stimularea participrii la
munc, toate acestea fiind politici care pot
contribui la scderea populaiei cu venituri
mici.
Retribuirea
corespunztoare
a
profesorilor, medicilor, funcionarilor publici
i specialitilor de nalt calificare ocupai n
instituiile publice i politicile orientate spre
susinerea profesiilor liberale pot contribui la
formarea i consolidarea clasei de mijloc i la
reducerea polarizrii sociale. Dezvoltarea i
modernizarea agriculturii, a economiei rurale
n general, i dezvoltarea regional sunt de
References
important crucial pentru combaterea
srciei i reducerea inegalitii, iar
perfecionarea
educaiei
i
formrii 1. Atkinson A.B., On the Measurement of
Inequality.
Journal of Economic
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

23

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

Theory, 2, 1970.
profesionale constituie un factor care poate
contribui la reducerea inegalitii i 2. Atkinson A.B., Is Rising Income
Inequality Inevitable? A Critique of the
polarizrii pe termen lung.
Transatlantic
Consensus,
UNU/WIDER Annual Lectures 3,
Bibliografie
November 1999.
3. Bradley D., Huber E., Moller St.,
1. Atkinson A.B., On the Measurement of
Nielsen F., Stephens J., Distribution
Inequality. Journal of Economic Theory,
and Redistribution in Post-Industrial
2, 1970.
Democracies, Luxembourg Income
2. Atkinson A.B., Is Rising Income
Study, Working Paper No. 265, 2001.
Inequality Inevitable? A Critique of the
4. Cornia G. A.(ed.), Inequality, Growth,
Transatlantic Consensus, UNU/WIDER
and Poverty in an Era of Liberalization
Annual Lectures 3, November 1999.
and Globalization, UnitedNations
3. Bradley D., Huber E., Moller St., Nielsen
University/World
Institute
for
F., Stephens J., Distribution and
Development Economics Research,
Redistribution
in
Post-Industrial
OxfordUniversity Press Inc., New
Democracies,
Luxembourg
Income
York, 2004.
Study, Working Paper No. 265, 2001.
5. Cowell,
F.A.,
Inequality:
4. Cornia G. A.(ed.), Inequality, Growth,
Measurement,
London School of
and Poverty in an Era of Liberalization
Economics and Political Science
and
Globalization,
UnitedNations
STICERD, Distributional Analysis
University/World
Institute
for
Research Programme Discussion Paper
Development Economics Research,
(DARP), 86, 2006.
OxfordUniversity Press Inc., New York,
6. Ehrenpreis D. (ed.), The challenge of
2004.
inequality,
UNDP International
5. Cowell, F.A., Inequality: Measurement,
Poverty Centre, Poverty in Focus, June
London School of Economics and
2007.
Political
Science

STICERD,
7. Esteban, J.M., Ray, D., On the
Distributional
Analysis
Research
measurement
of
polarization,
Programme Discussion Paper (DARP),
Econometrica, 62 (4), 1994.
86, 2006.
8. Foster, J. and Wolfson, M.,
6. Ehrenpreis D. (ed.), The challenge of
Polarization and the Decline of the
inequality,
UNDP International
Middle Class: Canada and the US.
Poverty Centre, Poverty in Focus, June
mimeo, Vanderbilt University, 1994;
2007.
Journal of Economic Inequality,
7. Esteban, J.M., Ray, D., On the
Published online: 19 November 2009..
measurement
of
polarization,
9.
Jesuit
D.,
Mahler
V.,
State
Econometrica, 62 (4), 1994.
Redistribution
in
Comparative
8. Foster, J. and Wolfson, M., Polarization
Perspective:
A
Cross-National
and the Decline of the Middle Class:
Analysis
of
the
Developed
Countries,
Canada and the US. mimeo, Vanderbilt
Luxembourg Income Study, Working
University, 1994; Journal of Economic
Paper No. 392, 2004.
Inequality,
Published
online:
10. Molnar M., Income distribution in
19 November 2009..
Romania, Paper prepared for the 31st
9. Jesuit D., Mahler V., State Redistribution
General
Conference
of
The
in Comparative Perspective: A CrossInternational
Association
for
Research
National Analysis of the Developed
in Income and Wealth, St-Gallen,
Countries, Luxembourg Income Study,
Switzerland, 22-28 August, 2010,
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

24

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

10.

11.
12.

13.
14.
15.

16.

17.

Working Paper No. 392, 2004.

Molnar M., Income distribution in
Romania, Paper prepared for the 31st
General Conference of The International
Association for Research in Income and
Wealth, St-Gallen, Switzerland, 22-28
August,
2010,
http://www.iariw.org/papers/2010/poster
2Molnar.pdf.
Molnar M., Inegalitatea veniturilor
gospodriilor din Romnia, Revista
Romn de Statistic, 7, 2010.
Molnar M., Distribuia veniturilor
populaiei din Romnia. Inegalitate i
polarizare, Institutul de Economie
Naional Academia Romn, 2009.
Molnar M., Poenaru M., Protecia social
n Romnia. Repere europene, Editura
BREN, Bucureti, 2008.
OECD, Growing Unequal: Income
Distribution and Poverty in OECD
Countries, OECD, Paris, 2008.
Poenaru, M., Politica social n Romania.
Provocri actuale i viitoare, Academia
Romn Institutul de Economie
Naional, Expert, Bucureti, 2009.
Wolfson, M.C., Foster, J., Inequality and
Polarization Concepts and Recent
Trends, Winter Meeting of the American
Statistical Association, Ft. Lauderdale,
January1993.
World Bank, Romania - Poverty
assessment (Vol.1 and 2): Main report
and Background papers, 2003.

11.
12.

13.

14.
15.

16.

17.

http://www.iariw.org/papers/2010/post
er2Molnar.pdf.
Molnar M., Romanian households
income
inequality,
Romanian
Statistical Review, 7, 2010.
Molnar M., Distribuia veniturilor
populaiei din Romnia. Inegalitate i
polarizare
(Households
income
distribution in Romania. Inequality and
polarization), Institute of National
Economy Romanian Academy, 2009.
Molnar M., Poenaru M., Protecia
social n Romnia. Repere europene
(Social protection in Romania), Editura
BREN, Bucureti, 2008.
OECD, Growing Unequal: Income
Distribution and Poverty in OECD
Countries, OECD, Paris, 2008.
Poenaru, M., Politica social n
Romania. Provocri actuale i viitoare
(Social Policy in Romania. Present and
future
challenges),
Romanian
Academy Institute of National
Economy, Expert, Bucureti, 2009.
Wolfson, M.C., Foster, J., Inequality
and Polarization Concepts and
Recent Trends, Winter Meeting of the
American Statistical Association, Ft.
Lauderdale, January1993.
World Bank, Romania - Poverty
assessment (Vol.1 and 2): Main report
and Background papers, 2003.

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

25

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

Anexa 1. Impactul redistribuirii veniturilor asupra inegalitii verticale i bipolarizrii

1995

200

2006

2007

2008

-0,107

-0,119

-0,148

-0,151

-0,157

82

81

79

78

80

66
16
18
-27

66
15
19
-29

63
16
21
-31

64
14
22
-32

67
13
20
-34

-0,134

-0,142

-0,207

-0,210

-0,212

81

87

82

80

82

69
12
19
-37

75
12
13
-37

71
11
18
-44

70
10
20
-45

73
9
18
-46

Inegalitatea (estimaii pe baza coeficienilor Gini)

Reducerea absolut datorit redistribuirii
Total
din care, %
Contribuia transferurilor sociale, total
din care, contribuia
- pensiilor
- celorlalte transferuri sociale
Contribuia fiscalitii (impozite i contribuii sociale)
Reducerea relativ datorit redistribuirii, total (%)
Polarizarea (estimaii pe baza indicilor Foster-Wolfson)
Reducerea absolut datorit redistribuirii
Total
din care, %
Contribuia transferurilor sociale, total
din care, contribuia
- pensiilor
- celorlalte transferuri sociale
Contribuia fiscalitii (impozite i contribuii sociale)
Reducerea relativ datorit redistribuirii, total (%)
Sursa: estimaii pe baza datelor INS AIG i ABF

Anexa 2. Reducerea relativ a inegalitii i polarizrii intergrupe datorit redistribuirii (%)

Inegalitatea intergrupe
(estimaii pe baza coeficientului Gini)
Statutul ocupaional al capului gospodriei
Prezena/absena cel puin unui salariat/patron
Nivelul de educaie a capului gospodriei
Tipul de gospodrie
Mediul de reziden
Regiunea
Polarizarea pe subpopulaii
(estimaii pe baza indicilor Esteban-Ray, = 1)
Statutul ocupaional al capului gospodriei
Prezena/absena cel puin unui salariat/patron
Nivelul de educaie a capului gospodriei
Tipul de gospodrie
Mediul de reziden
Regiunea
Sursa: estimaii pe baza datelor INS AIG i ABF

1995

2000

2006

2007

2008

-59
-65
-38
-37
-36
-14

-49
-56
-34
-37
-27
-18

-53
-57
-33
-47
-30
-25

-51
-59
-32
-46
-30
-25

-57
-54
-36
-48
-31
-27

-66
-69
-43
-39
-36
-16

-54
-59
-39
-37
-28
-18

-58
-62
-38
-51
-32
-24

-56
-63
-38
-50
-32
-24

63
-70
-43
-53
-40
-25

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

26

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Economie, Nr. 4/2010

Annex 1. The impact of the income redistribution on overall inequality and bipolarization
1995

2000

2006

2007

2008

-0.107

-0.119

-0.148

-0.151

-0.157

82

81

79

78

80

66
16
18
-27

66
15
19
-29

63
16
21
-31

64
14
22
-32

67
13
20
-34

Inequality (estimates based on Gini coefficients)

Absolute lessening due to redistributio
Total
out of which, %
Social transfers contribution, total
out of which, the contribution of
- pensions
- other social transfers
Tax contribution (income taxes and social contributions)
Relative lessening due to redistribution, total (%)
Polarization (estimates based on Foster-Wolfson indices)
Absolute lessening due to redistribution
-0.134
-0.142
-0.207
-0.210
-0.212
Total
out of which, %
Social transfers contribution, total
81
87
82
80
82
out of which, the contribution of
- pensions
69
75
71
70
73
12
12
11
10
9
- other social transfers
19
13
18
20
18
Tax contribution (income taxes and social contributions)
-37
-37
-44
-45
-46
Relative lessening due to redistribution, total (%)
Source: Estimates based on NIS HIS and HBS
Annex 2. Relative lessening of between-group income inequality and polarization due to redistribution,
(%)
Between-group inequality
(estimates based on Gini coefficients)
Occupation of household head
Household with/without employees/employer
Education level of household head
Household type
Urban/rural areas
Region
Polarization by sub-populations
(estimates based on Esteban-Ray indices, = 1)
Occupation of household head
Household with/without employees/employer
Education level of household head
Household type
Urban/rural areas
Region
Source: Estimates based on NIS HIS and HBS

1995

2000

2006

2007

2008

-59
-65
-38
-37
-36
-14

-49
-56
-34
-37
-27
-18

-53
-57
-33
-47
-30
-25

-51
-59
-32
-46
-30
-25

-57
-54
-36
-48
-31
-27

-66
-69
-43
-39
-36
-16

-54
-59
-39
-37
-28
-18

-58
-62
-38
-51
-32
-24

-56
-63
-38
-50
-32
-24

-63
-70
-43
-53
-40
-25

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Economy Series, Issue 4/2010

27