2156
Views
637
Downloads |
The impact of the COVID-19 crisis on income distribution under different protection schemes: the case of Spain
Gonzalo Gómez Bengoechea* 
Article | Year: 2021 | Pages: 517 - 541 | Volume: 45 | Issue: 4 Received: June 14, 2021 | Accepted: August 21, 2021 | Published online: December 6, 2021
|
FULL ARTICLE
FIGURES & DATA
REFERENCES
CROSSMARK POLICY
METRICS
LICENCING
PDF
Note: OECD countries. 2019 or latest year with available data. Source: OECD statistics.
|
Economic
sector
|
Aggregate variation in total
compensations March-April 2020
|
|
Agriculture
|
6.46
|
|
Other professional
activities
|
-9.60
|
|
Industrial
production
|
-11.45
|
|
Total for all sectors
|
-14.35
|
|
Arts
& education
|
-14.37
|
|
Financial
services
|
-14.90
|
|
Retail
|
-14.99
|
|
Manufacturing
|
-20.20
|
|
Construction
|
-20.20
|
|
Real-estate
|
-22.62
|
|
Hospitality
|
-75.80
|
Source: Authors’ estimations based on ECV data.
|
% of at-risk income lost
|
|
|
10
|
20
|
30
|
40
|
50
|
60
|
70
|
80
|
90
|
100
|
|
% of at-risk households
losing income
|
10
|
0.2
|
0.3
|
0.5
|
0.6
|
0.8
|
0.9
|
1.1
|
1.2
|
1.4
|
1.5
|
|
20
|
0.3
|
0.6
|
0.9
|
1.2
|
1.5
|
1.8
|
2.1
|
2.4
|
2.7
|
3.0
|
|
30
|
0.5
|
0.9
|
1.4
|
1.9
|
2.4
|
2.8
|
3.3
|
3.8
|
4.2
|
4.7
|
|
40
|
0.6
|
1.2
|
1.9
|
2.5
|
3.1
|
3.7
|
4.3
|
4.9
|
5.6
|
6.2
|
|
50
|
0.8
|
1.5
|
2.3
|
3.1
|
3.9
|
4.6
|
5.4
|
6.2
|
6.9
|
7.7
|
|
60
|
0.9
|
1.8
|
2.8
|
3.7
|
4.6
|
5.5
|
6.4
|
7.4
|
8.3
|
9.2
|
|
70
|
1.1
|
2.1
|
3.2
|
4.3
|
5.3
|
6.4
|
7.5
|
8.5
|
9.6
|
10.7
|
|
80
|
1.2
|
2.4
|
3.6
|
4.8
|
6.0
|
7.2
|
8.4
|
9.6
|
10.8
|
12.0
|
|
90
|
1.3
|
2.7
|
4.0
|
5.4
|
6.7
|
8.1
|
9.4
|
10.7
|
12.1
|
13.4
|
|
100
|
1.5
|
3.0
|
4.4
|
5.9
|
7.4
|
8.9
|
10.4
|
11.8
|
13.3
|
14.8
|
|
|
Income contraction
scenarios
|
|
Low-income
protection schemes
|
Concentrated
losses under NLIB
|
Dispersed losses under NLIB
|
|
Concentrated
losses under RMI
|
Dispersed losses under RMI
|
|
Concentrated
losses under IMV
|
Dispersed losses under IMV
|
|
Concentrated losses (90-80)
|
|
NUBI
|
Pre-COVID
|
Post-COVID
|
Change
|
New poor
|
|
1.9 $ /
day
|
0.75
|
0.89
|
0.14
|
67,682
|
|
3.2 $ /
day
|
0.80
|
1.01
|
0.21
|
101,286
|
|
5.5 $ /
day
|
0.86
|
1.19
|
0.34
|
159,502
|
|
National
poverty line
|
6.70
|
8.06
|
1.36
|
643,688
|
|
RMI
|
Pre-COVID
|
Post-COVID
|
Change
|
New poor
|
|
1.9 $ /
day
|
0.43
|
0.56
|
0.13
|
61,529
|
|
3.2 $ /
day
|
0.46
|
0.65
|
0.19
|
88,507
|
|
5.5 $ /
day
|
0.48
|
0.80
|
0.32
|
152,876
|
|
National
poverty line
|
6.49
|
8.01
|
1.52
|
719,416
|
|
RMV
|
Pre-COVID
|
Post-COVID
|
Change
|
New poor
|
|
1.9 $ /
day
|
0.45
|
0.53
|
0.08
|
37,391
|
|
3.2 $ /
day
|
0.49
|
0.58
|
0.09
|
42,124
|
|
5.5 $ /
day
|
0.51
|
0.67
|
0.16
|
74,781
|
|
National
poverty line
|
6.18
|
7.69
|
1.51
|
716,103
|
|
Dispersed losses (80-90)
|
|
NUBI
|
Pre-COVID
|
Post-COVID
|
Change
|
New poor
|
|
1.9 $ /
day
|
0.75
|
0.85
|
0.10
|
48,750
|
|
3.2 $ /
day
|
0.80
|
0.93
|
0.13
|
59,162
|
|
5.5 $ /
day
|
0.86
|
1.02
|
0.16
|
74,781
|
|
National
poverty line
|
6.70
|
8.13
|
1.43
|
678,712
|
|
RMI
|
Pre-COVID
|
Post-COVID
|
Change
|
New poor
|
|
1.9 $ /
day
|
0.43
|
0.53
|
0.11
|
50,643
|
|
3.2 $ /
day
|
0.46
|
0.58
|
0.12
|
58,689
|
|
5.5 $ /
day
|
0.48
|
0.64
|
0.16
|
77,621
|
|
National
poverty line
|
6.49
|
8.08
|
1.59
|
753,493
|
|
RMV
|
Pre-COVID
|
Post-COVID
|
Change
|
New poor
|
|
1.9 $ /
day
|
0.45
|
0.50
|
0.05
|
22,245
|
|
3.2 $ /
day
|
0.49
|
0.55
|
0.06
|
29,345
|
|
5.5 $ /
day
|
0.51
|
0.58
|
0.08
|
35,497
|
|
National
poverty line
|
6.18
|
7.76
|
1.58
|
747,814
|
|
Concentrated losses
|
|
|
Ex ante
|
Ex post
|
% change
|
|
NUBI
|
0.498
|
0.567
|
13.9
|
|
RMI
|
0.450
|
0.510
|
13.3
|
|
RMV
|
0.434
|
0.494
|
13.9
|
|
Dispersed losses
|
|
NUBI
|
0.498
|
0.550
|
10.5
|
|
RMI
|
0.450
|
0.493
|
9.6
|
|
RMV
|
0.434
|
0.477
|
10.0
|
Source: Author’s estimations based on ECV data.
|
|
Concentrated losses
|
Dispersed losses
|
|
|
From high to middle
|
From middle to poor
|
From high to middle
|
From middle to poor
|
|
NUBI
|
5.7
|
2.0
|
3.7
|
1.0
|
|
RMI
|
5.9
|
1.2
|
3.6
|
0.6
|
|
IMV
|
5.9
|
0.8
|
3.3
|
0.4
|
|
Country
|
Gini Index
|
Poverty rates
|
Social spending
(% of GDP)
|
|
Austria
|
0.28
|
9.4
|
26.9
|
|
Belgium
|
0.26
|
8.2
|
28.9
|
|
Canada
|
0.30
|
11.8
|
18.0
|
|
Chile
|
0.46
|
16.5
|
11.4
|
|
Chzech
Republic
|
0.25
|
6.1
|
19.2
|
|
Costa
Rica
|
0.50
|
19.9
|
12.2
|
|
Denmark
|
0.26
|
6.1
|
28.3
|
|
Deutschland
|
0.29
|
10.4
|
25.9
|
|
Estonia
|
0.31
|
16.3
|
17.7
|
|
Finland
|
0.27
|
6.5
|
29.1
|
|
France
|
0.30
|
8.5
|
31.0
|
|
Great
Britain
|
0.37
|
11.7
|
20.6
|
|
Greece
|
0.31
|
12.1
|
24.0
|
|
Hungary
|
0.29
|
8.0
|
18.1
|
|
Ireland
|
0.29
|
9.0
|
13.4
|
|
Israel
|
0.25
|
16.9
|
16.3
|
|
Italy
|
0.33
|
13.9
|
28.2
|
|
Latvia
|
0.34
|
17.5
|
16.4
|
|
Lithuania
|
0.36
|
15.5
|
16.7
|
|
Luxembourg
|
0.32
|
11.4
|
21.6
|
|
Mexico
|
0.42
|
16.6
|
7.5
|
|
Netherlands
|
0.29
|
8.3
|
16.1
|
|
Norway
|
0.26
|
8.4
|
25.3
|
|
Poland
|
0.28
|
9.8
|
21.3
|
|
Portugal
|
0.32
|
10.4
|
22.6
|
|
Slovakia
|
0.24
|
7.7
|
17.7
|
|
Slovenia
|
0.25
|
7.5
|
21.1
|
|
South
Korea
|
0.35
|
16.7
|
12.2
|
|
Spain
|
0.33
|
14.2
|
24.7
|
|
Sweden
|
0.28
|
8.9
|
25.5
|
|
Switzerland
|
0.30
|
9.2
|
16.7
|
|
United States
|
0.39
|
17.8
|
18.7
|
Note: OECD Countries, 2019 or latest year with available data. Source: Author’s estimations based on OECD statistics.
|
Protection
scheme and region
|
Min. benefit amount
|
Max. benefit amount
|
|
RMI Andalucía
|
5,287.44
|
4,541.88
|
|
RMI Aragón
|
5,892.00
|
5,892.00
|
|
RMI Asturias
|
5,315.52
|
3,455.04
|
|
RMI Baleares
|
5,178.36
|
4,140.60
|
|
RMI Canarias
|
5,745.24
|
2,267.76
|
|
RMI Cantabria
|
5,163.24
|
2,904.36
|
|
RMI Castilla- La
Mancha
|
5,357.40
|
4,079.76
|
|
RMI Castilla y León
|
5,168.40
|
3,221.88
|
|
RMI Cataluña
|
7,248.00
|
6,216.00
|
|
RMI Ceuta
|
3,600.00
|
1,440.00
|
|
RMI Extremadura
|
5,163.24
|
3,549.73
|
|
RMI Galicia
|
5,084.16
|
4,067.28
|
|
RMI La Rioja
|
5,163.24
|
2,904.36
|
|
RMI Madrid
|
4,800.00
|
5,722.20
|
|
RMI Melilla
|
5,503.68
|
3,669.12
|
|
RMI Murcia
|
5,163.24
|
4,517.88
|
|
RMI Navarra
|
7,329.60
|
7,329.60
|
|
RMI Valencia
|
3,090.84
|
6,623.04
|
|
RMI País Vasco
|
7,733.88
|
4,130.64
|
|
IMV National
|
5,544.00
|
6,636.00
|
|
Economic sector
|
Decile 1
|
Decile 2
|
Decile 3
|
Decile 4
|
Decile 5
|
Decile 6
|
Decile 7
|
Decile 8
|
Decile 9
|
Decile 10
|
|
Agriculture
|
13.2
|
13.4
|
16.0
|
11.2
|
6.3
|
3.8
|
3.2
|
2.8
|
1.8
|
0.7
|
|
Arts
& education
|
7.9
|
9.1
|
5.5
|
5.3
|
5.3
|
6.8
|
8.3
|
10.8
|
11.7
|
14.1
|
|
Construction
|
5.3
|
7.7
|
7.8
|
7.8
|
8.8
|
7.9
|
6.8
|
5.2
|
6.3
|
4.2
|
|
Financial
services
|
2.6
|
0.5
|
1.2
|
0.7
|
1.1
|
1.2
|
1.3
|
2.7
|
3.1
|
5.9
|
|
Hospitality
|
13.2
|
7.2
|
11.9
|
9.5
|
10.6
|
8.1
|
6.8
|
6.3
|
5.2
|
2.8
|
|
Industrial
production
|
5.3
|
4.3
|
4.6
|
6.4
|
6.8
|
7.8
|
6.9
|
7.6
|
7.0
|
6.2
|
|
Manufacturing
|
0.0
|
9.6
|
8.2
|
10.5
|
12.8
|
15.3
|
12.8
|
15.7
|
16.8
|
15.0
|
|
Other
professional activities
|
28.9
|
28.2
|
27.1
|
27.5
|
26.8
|
29.6
|
31.4
|
29.6
|
29.9
|
33.7
|
|
Real-estate
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.2
|
0.6
|
1.0
|
0.7
|
0.5
|
0.7
|
0.6
|
1.0
|
|
Retail
|
21.1
|
17.7
|
15.1
|
16.6
|
16.7
|
14.8
|
17.8
|
13.2
|
12.8
|
10.3
|
Source: Author’s estimations based on ECV data.
Aguilar-Hendrickson, M. and Arriba González de Durana, A., 2020. Out of the wilderness? The coming back of the debate on minimum income in Spain and the Great Recession. Social Policy & Administration, 54(4), pp. 556-573 [ CrossRef]
AIREF, 2020. Informe sobre las líneas fundamentales de los presupuestos de las Administraciones Publicas 2021. Tech. Rep. No. 29/20.
Asha, S., 2018. Richard Baldwin: The Great Convergence: Information Technology and the New Globalization. New Global Studies, 12(2), pp. 297-300 [ CrossRef]
Aspachs, O. [et al.], 2020. Real-time inequality and the welfare state in motion: Evidence from COVID-19 in Spain. Economics Working Papers, No. 1734 [ CrossRef]
Ayala, L., [et al.], 2021. The effectiveness of minimum income benefits in poverty reduction in Spain. International Journal of Social Welfare, 30(2), pp. 152-169 [ CrossRef]
Baena-Díez, J. M. [et al.], 2020. Impact of COVID-19 outbreak by income: hitting hardest the most deprived. Journal of public health, 42(4), pp. 698-703 [ CrossRef]
Belzunegui-Eraso, A. and Erro-Garcés, S., 2020. Teleworking in the Context of the Covid-19 Crisis. Sustainability, 12(9) [ CrossRef]
BOE, 2020. Real Decretoley 20/2020, de 29 de mayo, por el que se establece el ingreso mínimo vital. Boletín Oficial del Estado, pp. 36022–3606 [ CrossRef]
Bourguignon, F., 2011. Non-anonymous growth incidence curves, income mobility and social welfare dominance. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 9, pp. 605-627 [ CrossRef]
Brussevich, M., Dabla-Norris, E. and Khalid, S., 2020. Teleworking is Not Working for the Poor, the Young, and the Women. IMF Blog, July 7, 2020.
Deaton, A., 2021. COVID-19 and Global Income Inequality. NBER Working Paper, No. 28392 [ CrossRef]
Gómez-Bengoechea, G. and Quan, S., 2019. Fiscal Redistribution in Spain in 2017. Commitment to Equity Institute Technical report.
Immervoll, H. and Richardson, L., 2011. Redistribution Policy and Inequality Reduction in OECD Countries: What Has Changed in Two Decades? OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 122 [ CrossRef]
Johnson, A. F. and Roberto, K. J., 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic: Time for a universal basic income? Public Administration and Development, 40(4), pp. 232-235 [ CrossRef]
Johnson, M. [et al.], 2020. Mitigating social and economic sources of trauma: the need for Universal Basic Income during the Coronavirus Pandemic. Psychological Trauma Theory Research Practice and Policy, 12(S1), S191-S192 [ CrossRef]
Kahn, L. M., 2012. Labor market policy: A comparative view on the costs and benefits of labor market flexibility. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 31(1), pp. 94-110 [ CrossRef]
Keid, M. G., 1954. Income Redistribution and Social Policy: A Set of Studies. London: Jonathan Cape, 1954. 25s. net. T he ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 295(1), p. 165 [ CrossRef]
Lakner, C. [et al.], 2019. How Much Does Reducing Inequality Matter for Global Poverty? Policy Research Working Paper Series, No. 8869 [ CrossRef]
Lambert, P. J., 1992. The Distribution and Redistribution of Income. London: Macmillan Education.
Lustig, N., Pessino, C. and Scott, J., 2014. The Impact of Taxes and Social Spending on Inequality and Poverty in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, and Uruguay: Introduction to the Special Issue. Public Finance Review, 42(3), pp. 287-303 [ CrossRef]
Milanovic, B. (ed.), 2012. Globalization and Inequality. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Musgrave, R. A. [et al.], 1951. Distribution of tax payments by income groups: a case study for 1948. National Tax Journal, 4(1), pp. 1-53 [ CrossRef]
Musgrave, R. A., 1959. The Theory of Public Finance: A Study in Public Economy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Musgrave, R. A., Case, K. E. and Leonard, H., 1974. The Distribution of Fiscal Burdens and Benefits. Public Finance Quarterly, 2(3), pp. 259-311 [ CrossRef]
Natili, M., 2018. Explaining different trajectories of minimum income schemes: Groups, parties and political exchange in Italy and Spain. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(2), pp. 116-129 [ CrossRef]
Pechman, J. A., 1985. Who paid the taxes, 1966-85? Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Pollán, M. [et al.], 2020. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in Spain (ENE-COVID): a nationwide, population-based seroepidemiological study. The Lancet, 396(10250), pp. 535-544 [ CrossRef]
Ravallion, M., 2003. Measuring Aggregate Welfare in Developing Countries: How Well Do National Accounts and Surveys Agree? T he Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(3), pp. 645- 652 [ CrossRef]
Widerquist, K., 2013. Basic Income: An Anthology of Contemporary Research. John Wiley & Sons Incorporated.
|
|
December, 2021
IV/2021 |
