Keywords
economic liberalization
urban areas
Gini coefficient
Urban Employment National Survey
How to Cite
Abstract
This article analyzes the evolution of income wage inequality, measured by the Gini coefficient, in 12 urban areas of Mexico- by population and state gross domestic product (GDP)-from 1987 to 2002, and the relationship with other variables associated with the process of economic liberalization, such as commercial openness (CO), exports, foreign direct investment (FDI), and gdp by state manufacturer. We contrast the relationship between variables with the Kuznets' inverse "U" hypothesis using panel data analysis, cross section and time series in the regional analysis (urban zones and federal states).
References
Alarcón, Diana. 1994. Changes in the Distribution of Income in Mexico and Trade Liberalization. Tijuana: El Colegio de la Frontera Norte.
–––––––––– y Ferry McKinley 1998. Mercado de trabajo y desigualdad del ingreso en México. Papeles de Población 4 (18): 49–80.
Ahluwalia, M. 1976. Inequality, Poverty and Development. Journal of Development Economics 6: 307–342.
Alvargonzález, Mercedes y Ana Jesús López. 2003. Desigualdad y crecimiento económico. Un estudio analítico empírico del proceso de Kuznets. Documento de trabajo. Departamento de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Oviedo.
Arellano, Manuel. 1991. Introducción al análisis econométrico con panel de datos. Documento de trabajo no. 9222. Madrid: Banco de España.
Baltagi, Badi. 2002. Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, LTD.
BANCOMEXT. 2004. Características del comercio exterior de México. México: BANCOMEXT.
Banco Mundial. 2005. Informe sobre el desarrollo mundial. Panorama general: equidad y desarrollo. Washington: Banco Mundial.
––––––––––. 2004. La pobreza en México: una evaluación de las condiciones, las tendencias y la estrategia de gobierno. Washington: Banco Mundial.
Calderón, Cuauhtémoc e Ismael Plascencia. 2007. Does Economic Openness in Mexico Promote Economic Growth? En Studies of Sweden and Mexico: Economics, Finance, Trade and Environment, editado por Ignacio Perrotini Hernández y Fadi Zaher, 26–41. Estocolmo: University of Skövde.
Cortés, Fernando. 2000. La distribución del ingreso en México en épocas de estabilización y reforma económica. México: Miguel Ángel Porrúa y Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social.
Dawson, P. J. 1997. On Testing Kuznets Economic Growth Hypothesis. Applied Economic Letters 4: 409–410.
Deininger, K. y L. Squire. 1996. A New Data Set Measuring Income Inequality. World Bank Economic Review 10: 565–591.
El Financiero. 2006. México es la décima economía del mundo en términos del PIB.
Frazer, Garth. 2006. Inequality and Development Across and Within Countries. World Development 34 (9): 1459–1481.
Frees, Edward. 2004. Longitudinal and Data Panel. Analysis and Applications in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Garza, Gustavo. 2005. La urbanización de México en el siglo XX, tomo I. México: El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Demográficos y de Desarrollo Urbano.
Glomm, G. y B. Ravikumar. 1998. Increasing Returns, Human Capital, and the Kuznets Curve. Journal of Development Economics 55 (2): 353–367.
Gujarati, Damodar. 2004. Econometría. México: McGraw Hill.
Hausman, J. A. 1978. Specification Test in Econometrics. Econometrica 46 (6): 1251–1271.
Hernández Laos, Enrique. 1999. Evolución de la distribución del ingreso de los hogares (1963–1989). En Pobreza y distribución del ingreso en México, coordinado por Julio Boltvinik y Enrique Hernández Laos, 154–190. México: Siglo XXI.
–––––––––– y Jorge Velázquez. 2003. Globalización, dualismo y distribución del ingreso en México. El Trimestre Económico 70 (279): 535–577.
Hirschman, Albert y Michael Rothschield. 1973. The Changing Tolerance for Income Inequality in the Course of Economic Development. The Quaterly Journal of Economics 87 (4): 544–566.
Hsiao, Cheng. 1996. Analyses of Panel Data. Econometric Society Monographs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hirschman, Albert. 1981. Essays in Trespassing. Economics to Politics and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hsing, Y. y D. J. Smith. 1994. Kuznets Inverted U Hypothesis Revisited. Applied Economic Letters 1: 111–113.
INEGI. 2006. Banco de Información Económica. Sistema de Cuentas Nacionales http://dgcnesyp.inegi.gob.mx/cgi–win/bdieintsi.exe.
––––––––––. 2003. Síntesis metodológica de la Encuesta nacional de empleo urbano. Aguascalientes: INEGI, Dirección General de Estadística.
––––––––––. 2001. Documento metodológico de la Encuesta nacional de empleo urbano. Aguascalientes: INEGI.
––––––––––. 1988–2002. Base de datos. Encuesta nacional de empleo urbano. Aguascalientes: INEGI, Dirección General de Estadística.
Kuznets, Simon. 1963. Quantitative Aspects of the Economic Growth of Nations: Distribution of Income by Size. Economic Development and Cultural Change 12: 1–80.
––––––––––. 1955. Economic Growth and Income Inequality. American Economic Review 45: 1–28.
Medina, Fernando. 2001. Consideraciones sobre el índice de Gini para medir la concentración del ingreso. Estudios Estadísticos y Prospectivos. Serie 9. Santiago de Chile: Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
Morley Samuel. 2001. The Income Distribution Problem in Latin America and the Caribbean. Santiago de Chile: CEPAL.
––––––––––. 2000. Efectos del crecimiento y las reformas económicas sobre la distribución del ingreso en América Latina. Santiago de Chile: CEPAL.
Oshima, Harry. 1962. The International Comparison of Size Distribution of Family Income with Special Reference to Asia. The Review of Economics and Statistics 44 (4): 439–445.
Paukert, F. 1973. Income Distribution at Different Levels of Development: A Survey of Evidence. International Labor Review 108: 97–125.
Plascencia, Ismael. 2007. Propuesta para la medición del desarrollo económico salarial: aplicación en doce de las principales áreas urbanas de México, 1988–2002. Papeles de Población 13 (52): 137–182.
Ray Debraj. 1998. Development Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Székely, Miguel. 1999. La desigualdad en México: una perspectiva internacional. Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo.
Taylor, Lance y Edmar Bacha. 1976.The Unequalizing Spiral: A First Growth Model for Belinda. The Quaterly Journal of Economics 90 (2): 197–218.
Thornton, J. 2001.The Kuznets Inverted U Hypothesis: Panel Data Evidence from 96 Countries. Applied Economic Letters 5: 693–697.
Wooldridge, Jeffrey. 2001. Introducción a la econometría. Un enfoque moderno. Buenos Aires: Thompson Learning.
World Bank. 2000. Entering the 21st century. World Development Report 1999/2000. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Open access policy
The authors who publish in región y sociedad accept the following conditions:
In accordance with the copyright laws, región y sociedad recognizes and respects the authors’ moral rights, as well as the ownership of property rights, which will be transferred to the journal to disseminate the articles in open access. región y sociedad does not charge the authors for submitting and processing articles for publication.
All the texts published by región y sociedad —with no exception— are distributed under a Creative Commons license 4.0 Attribution – Noncommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0 International), which allows third parties to use the publication as long as they mention the works’ authorship and the first publication in this journal.
The authors can enter into independent and additional contractual agreements for the nonexclusive distribution of the version of the article published in región y sociedad (for instance include it into an institutional repository or publish it in a book) as long as they clearly indicate that the work was published for the first time in región y sociedad.
For all the above, the author(s) must send the Letter of transfer of property rights of the first publication duly filled in and signed by the author(s). This letter can be sent by e-mail as a PDF to: region@colson.edu.mx