An Equity Theory of Predistribution

In e na ional Jou nal o Social Science and Human Resea ch
ISSN (p in ): 2644-0679, ISSN (online): 2644-0695
Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025
DOI: 10.47191/ijssh / 8-i11-27, Impac ac o - 8.007
Page No: 8727-8746
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8727
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
M . Ga e h B endan Boswell, PhD
Uni e si y o Abe deen, King's College, Abe deen AB24 3FX
ABSTRACT: Resea ch on a i udes owa ds inequali y sugges s he possibili y o a causal ela ionship whe eby a i udes o
inequali y a ec inequali y le els and whe e le els o inequali y a ec a i udes o inequali y. This pape ex ends esea ch on
epis emic belie s and mac o-le el inequali y wi h an empi ical analysis o mic o-le el “Equi y Belie s” de ined as alue judgemen s
as o he ai ness o ma ke ou comes, wi hin he con ex o “p edis ibu ion” ha Jacob Hacke de ined as “ he way in which he
ma ke dis ibu es i s ewa ds in he i s place” (2011, p. 35).
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion is posi ed and i s p edic ions a e in es iga ed ha , i. Equi y Belie s eme ge om expe iences
o income inequali y, ii. Equi y Belie s exe a p edis ibu i e e ec on inequali y, and iii) Equi y Belie s mode a e disposable
income inequali y. Sepa a e models a e speci ied o es hese p oposi ions empi ically a he coun y le el, using da a om he
Eu opean Union spanning he pe iod 1984 o 2018. The esul s suppo each o he p oposi ions. Addi ionally, his s udy inds ha
Equi y Belie s exace ba e disposable income inequali y ia i s in e ac ion wi h co po a e employmen policy.
This esea ch highligh s he ole o mic o-le el belie s as an an eceden o esou ce alloca ions ha shape mac o-le el inequali y,
and i in o ms go e nmen and co po a e-le el ac o s seeking o educe inequali y wi hin and among coun ies, ha p og ess on UN
SDG no. 10 is con ingen upon add essing socie al no ions o equi y. In line wi h his conclusion, he s udy ad oca es o
de elopmen o “equi y a ge s” o employmen income ha could po en ially be ope a ionalized h ough hei in eg a ion in o a
u u e ISO Equali y Ce i ica ion amewo k.
KEYWORDS: Income dis ibu ion, Epis emic belie s, Beha iou al Mac oeconomics, Inequali y, Wel a e S a e
1 INTRODUCTION
Since 1980, income inequali y has been ising globally and is expec ed o con inue inc easing (A kinson, 2015; Mo elli, Smeeding,
& Thompson, 2015). Resea ch links high inequali y o slowe economic g ow h, ma ke ine iciencies, and weakened social
cohesion (Cingano, 2014; de Chaumon , 2012; Wo ld Bank, 2005). The dele e ious social e ec s o income inequali y a e well
documen ed (Picke , Gauha , Wilkinson, & Sahni-Nicholas, 2024). Consequen ly, he Uni ed Na ions Sus ainable De elopmen
Goal 10 aims o educe inequali y wi hin and among coun ies by 2030 (UN, 2021).
A e sion o inequali y migh he e o e be expec ed o encou age mi iga ing policies. Howe e , a Wo ld Bank epo (C uz, Fos e ,
Quillin, & Schellekens, 2015) e eals ha a e sion o income inequali y dec eases wi h ising income le el as shown in Figu e
1.1.1, whe e on he le scale, p e e ences o mo e equali y a e indica ed by 1 and p e e ences o la ge income di e ences as
incen i es by 10 and income deciles a e shown on he bo om scale. Whe e inequali y a e sion dec eases mo ing up he scale on
he le , he egional ends show ha a e sion o inequali y consis en ly alls wi h ising income le el
1
.
Inequali y p e e ence by egion and decile (Wo ld Values Su ey, 2010-2014)
Sou ce: C uz e al. (2015)
1
These esul s a e colla ed om su ey esponses o wa e 6 o he WVS and ep esen six y coun ies o e he pe iod 2010 o
2014.
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8728
The Wo ld Values Su ey da a aligns wi h heo e ical and empi ical e idence sugges ing ha indi iduals assess hei well-being
h ough in e pe sonal compa isons o hei ela i e posi ion in he income hie a chy (Basu, 1994; B ighouse & Swi , 2006, p. 490;
Cla k & D'Amb osio, 2015; Mankiw & Taylo , 2017; Milano ic, 2004; Sen, 2000, p. 66). When people judge hei pe sonal well-
being ela i e o pee s a he han in absolu e e ms, he ue impac o income inequali y can be obscu ed, and since p oblems
ela ed o inequali y ha e s eep social g adien s and a e mo e common in he lowe income deciles (Wilkinson & Picke , 2009) he
e ec s o inequali y a e unlikely o be ully app ecia ed by he be e -o membe s o socie y.
The p e e ences o indi iduals o inequali y and o edis ibu ion may a y o a a ie y o easons. Low-income indi iduals may
endo se lowe inequali y due o an an icipa ed bene i o hemsel es om edis ibu ion whe eas high income indi iduals, in hei
own sel -in e es , may be mo e accep ing o highe le els o inequali y (Alesina & Giuliano, 2011) and oppose edis ibu ion
(And eß & Heien, 2001; Blekesaune, 2007; Rehm, 2009). A i udes owa ds inequali y may also s em om an a e sion o inequali y
o be based on belie s abou ai ness ha may a y acco ding o he indi idual’s ela i e posi ion (Senik, 2009). Sel -in e es heo ies
he e o e p edic ha ising inequali y may ei he be iewed as accep able o lead o discon en subjec o he ela i e posi ion o
indi iduals (Medgyesi, 2013). Socioeconomic di e ences, he e o e, may di e en ially a ec policies ha a ec economic
inequali y and may weaken he poli ical will o add ess i . Fu he mo e, i ising inequali y is conside ed a jus ou come o ee
ma ke p ocesses, belie s abou he equi abili y o ma ke ou comes may suppo ising inequali y.
This is sugges ed by a s ong, nea -pe ec co ela ion be ween ising le els o inequali y and me i oc a ic belie s
2
, as obse ed in
he Uni ed Kingdom since he la e 1970s by (Mijs & Sa age, 2020). This phenomenon is no unique o he Uni ed Kingdom. Mijs
(2021) epo s ha as income inequali y ose be ween 1987 and 2012, a leas wo- hi ds o ci izens in wen y- h ee Wes e n
coun ies ha e become mo e con inced ha he ising inequali y is me i ed. This inding is suppo ed by he esea ch o he s (Bucca,
2016; Du u-Bella & Ten e , 2012; McCall, 2013; Pasko & Dewilde, 2012)
3
, which sugges s his may be a uni e sal esponse o
ising inequali y. Al e na i ely, i could sugges ha because ma ke ou comes a e conside ed equi able, ising income inequali y is
pa ly due o mic o-le el belie s suppo ing policies ha acili a e i .
The exis ing li e a u e on inequali y and belie s has la gely neglec ed he possibili y o belie s as a ac o con ibu ing o he ise in
inequali y. Indeed, a e iew by Janmaa (2013) concludes esea ch would bene i by demons a ing ha “ iews on inequali y ha e
an e ec on social ou comes complemen a y o ha o objec i e inequali ies" (Janmaa , 2013, p. 357). The cu en pape answe s
his call wi h an empi ical s udy o he ela ionship be ween belie s and inequali y, in he con ex o “p edis ibu ion”, ha Jabob
Hacke de ined as “ he way in which he ma ke dis ibu es i s ewa ds in he i s place” (2011, p. 35). The esul s indica e a
signi ican ela ionship be ween le els o mac oeconomic inequali y among EU coun ies o e he pas ou decades and belie s
abou he ai ness o ma ke ou comes. This s udy inds ha such belie s in luence policy decisions and con ibu e o g ea e
disposable income inequali y h ough co po a e policies ha a ec employmen .
In Sec ion 2 o his pape , p e ious s udies ha ha e analysed he ela ionship be ween belie s and inequali y a e e iewed. These
s udies ha e ound ei he ind no ela ionship (Hadle , 2005), a posi i e ela ionship whe e a e sion o inequali y ises as inequali y
ises (Ke , 2014; Lübke , 2004, 2007; Medgyesi, 2013; Suh cke, 2001) o an accep ance o ising le els o inequali y (Kenwo hy
& McCall, 2008). O he s ha e ound p e e ences o inequali y o coincide wi h inequali y le els (Ande sen & Yaish, 2012; Mu hi
& Tiongson, 2009) o ha ising inequali y is accep ed on he basis o di e ences be ween wo ke skillse s (Ke , 2014). This
sec ion also e iews Equi y Theo y (Adams, 1963, 1965; Adams & F eedman, 1976; Le en hal, 1976) in ela ion o di e en ial
belie s among i m s akeholde s in ela ion o esou ce alloca ions.
Sec ion 3 ou lines he da a and me hodology, in oduces an analy ical amewo k o p edis ibu ion, and p oposes an Equi y Theo y
o P edis ibu ion o guide he in es iga ion o he esea ch hypo heses. Sec ion 4 p esen s he analysis esul s, while Sec ion 5
discusses he main indings. Sec ion 6 concludes ha Equi y Belie s signi ican ly con ibu e o ising disposable income inequali y
by legi imizing employmen p ac ices ha exace ba e i . The main implica ion o his inding is ha , in ules-based economies,
e o s o cu b inequali y would equi e policy amewo ks g ounded in p inciples o equi abili y ha challenge p e ailing socie al
belie s. The sec ion also o e s he au ho ’s sugges ions o u u e esea ch di ec ions.
2
Me i oc a ic belie s is de ined as he iew ha “success is de e mined by ha d wo k”.
3
Bucca (2016) ound in se en La in-Ame ican coun ies ha people a e mo e likely o belie e ha weal h and po e y a e due o
indi idual me i s o aul s a he han s uc u al cons ain s. In a s udy o wen y-six coun ies, Du u-Bella and Ten e (2012)
ound ha pe cep ions o a p e ailing me i oc acy ( he iew ha e o and skills a e wha de e mines ewa ds) and con ic ions
ha me i oc a ic belie s ( he iew ha one’s income ough o be de e mined by educa ion and aining) a e mos p e alen in
socie ies wi h high le els o inequali y. McCall (2013) ound ha conce n o e ising inequali y in ecen decades inc eased in he
Uni ed S a es bu suppo o social insu ance policies emained low. McCall (2013) asc ibes his esul o me i oc a ic belie s
cen e ed on expanding equal oppo uni ies and ea nings edis ibu ion in he wo kplace. Pasko and Dewilde (2012) s udied
wen y-six Eu opean coun ies and ound ha wel a e-sen imen in bo h low- and high-income households is lowe in mo e
unequal coun ies.
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8729
2 PREVIOUS LITERATURE
The heo e ical in e ac ion be ween sel -in e es and ising inequali y has been s udied empi ically by se e al me hods using su ey
da a o ei he inequali y a e sion o o pe sonal p e e ences o income inequali y.
Rela ed empi ical s udies
Kenwo hy and McCall (2008) analysed ime ends o ma ke income inequali y and inequali y a e sion using ISSP da a o eigh
coun ies (USA, UK, Aus alia, Canada, I aly, Ge many, Sweden and No way). They ound ha in he mid-1980 o mid-1990 pe iod,
Ame icans pe cei ed income di e ences in he Uni ed S a es as “ oo la ge” bu ha la e , e en whils inequali y con inued o ise,
public pe cep ions o income di e ences being “ oo la ge” dec eased.
4
Se e al c oss-sec ional coun y-le el s udies ha e ound highe income inequali ies o be associa ed wi h belie s ha inequali ies
a e oo la ge. Lübke (2004) analysed inequali y ends and pe cep ions o inequali y in wen y- ou coun ies o 1987, 1992 and
1999
5
and sepa a ely, Lübke (2007) analysed ‘e alua ions o inequali y’ in 1999 ia OLS eg ession using dummy a iables o
social jus ice no ms o g oups o wen y-six coun ies. Suh cke (2001) analysed a i udes o inequali y and edis ibu ion using 1999
ISSP da a o wen y- h ee coun ies o in es iga e he e ec o he ansi ion om socialism o capi alism
6
.
By con as , Hadle (2005) ound no signi ican e ec o inequali y le els on opinions o e he le el o inequali y using a mul i-
le el logis ic eg ession model ha included con ols o coun y di e ences o G oss Na ional P oduc a pu chasing powe pa i y,
dominan eligion and ideology o hi y coun ies using 1999 ISSP da a.
Mu hi and Tiongson (2009), using WVS da a, analysed changes o inequali y p e e ences o e 1990-2001 and ound lowe
inequali y le els in Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies o be associa ed wi h g ea e p e e ences o equali y. The au ho s
conclude ha g ea e a e sion o inequali y in Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies led o s onge suppo o edis ibu ion and
consequen ly o lowe inequali y is-à- is pos -So ie coun ies. Thei s udy employed a P obi model speci ied o explain equali y
p e e ence as a unc ion o indi idual and coun y-le el cha ac e is ics, using dummy a iables o each coun y and o coun y
g oups. Simila ly, Ande sen and Yaish (2012) ound a close associa ion be ween a high desi ed le el o inequali y and highe le els
o inequali y in wen y capi alis coun ies o e 1992-1999 using ISSP da a. Thei analysis con olled o indi idual-le el
cha ac e is ics such as occupa ional class, and coun y-le el cha ac e is ics including GDP.
Using a combina ion o ISSP and WVS da a, Ke (2014) ound a highe conce n o e inequali y in socie ies in which income
inequali y was ising bu simul aneously, a highe accep ance o ising income di e en ials be ween wo ke s o di e en skillse s.
Medgyesi (2013), measu ed in e empo al a ia ion o a i udes o inequali y using WVS da a o e he pe iod 1990-2010 ia mul i-
le el analysis and coun y ixed e ec s models, and ound ha discon en wi h inequali y ises along wi h ising inequali y a
household le el.
Equi y and esou ce alloca ions
Equi y Theo y as p oposed by S acy Adams (1963, 1965) sugges s ha he alloca ion o ewa ds and esou ces in social exchanges
will be in p opo ion o he pe cei ed use ulness o indi iduals’ ac ions (Le en hal, 1976). Social sys ems ypically a ou alloca ion
no ms o he han equi y (o me i ) alone. Such no ms may be equali y, ecip oci y, he ul ilmen o needs whe e hey a ise, o he
ul ilmen o commi men s. Le en hal (1976) discusses he impo ance o no ms in alue alloca ion decisions and concludes ha an
alloca o will ollow an equi y no m whe e he/she belie es ha he dis ibu ion o ewa ds and esou ces will maximise indi idual
p oduc i i y and g oup pe o mance o e he long e m. An alloca o who wishes o p ese e ha mony may o he wise adop an
equali y no m and dis ibu e ewa ds mo e e enly. The choice o which no m o ollow s ems om an a emp o be ai and jus ,
and also o gain he bene i s o any pa icula no m o he alloca o hemsel es and o he membe s o he sys em.
Whils equi y heo y has he capaci y o explain a b oad spec um o social beha iou (Adams & F eedman, 1976) and p edic s ha
equi able alloca ions will os e high p oduc i i y o e he long un, he e a e impo an di e ences in alloca ion decisions be ween
indi iduals and hose o g oups (Bu ns ein & Ka z, 1972). G oup-le el alloca ion no ms ha a e implemen ed o ins umen al
easons and a e deemed equi able a g oup le el may hen no cons i u e an equi able alloca ion a indi idual le el. Hence, an
alloca o may o e - ewa d a speci ic s akeholde (i.e. CEOs) a he expense o o he ecipien s o elici be e g oup pe o mance
(Le en hal, 1976).
Thus, whe e Sjöbe g (2008) a gues he Anglo-Ame ican model o co po a e go e nance induces manage s o p io i ise sha eholde
in e es s o e employee in e es s, an al e na i e iew is ha a g oup le el alloca ion no m is main ained in o de o e ain owne ship
con ol o e co po a e in e es s such as long- e m p oduc i i y. By con as , whe e he Eu opean model o go e nance is desc ibed
4
The ocus o Kenwo hy and McCall’s s udy is he median o e heo em. Thei indings in ega ds o le els o income
inequali y and pe cep ions o whe he income inequali y is oo high a e ne e heless ele an he e.
5
see Table 3 in Lübke (2004, p. 107)
6
Suh cke’s logis ic eg ession me hodology employed dummy a iables o g oups o coun ies ep esen ing hose ha unde wen
a ansi ion om socialis command economies o capi alism and wes e n coun ies, and included con ols such as socio-economic
posi ion, pe sonal mobili y expe ience, indi idual and household cha ac e is ics and p oxies o indi idual ideology.
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8730
as os e ing a g ea e awa eness o labou in e es s (Sjöbe g, 2008, p. 524), his may ins ead be cha ac e ised as a g oup le el equi y
no m p oceeding om “coun y-speci ic economic in e es s and socialisa ion expe iences” (And eß & Heien, 2001, p. 337).
P edis ibu ion and Equi y Belie s
P edis ibu ion is op imis ically iewed as a emedy o he con es ed poli ics o he edis ibu i e s a e (Pie son, 2016) and
p edis ibu i e policy as “ma ke e o ms ha encou age a mo e equal dis ibu ion o economic powe and ewa ds e en be o e
go e nmen collec s axes o pays ou bene i s” (Hacke , 2011, p. 35). Achie ing his en ails “ ew i ing he ules o make ma ke s
compe i i e, ix inance, incen i ize g ow h, ebalance ax and ans e s, boos employmen , empowe wo ke s, and expand
economic secu i y and access o labou ma ke s.” (Eynon, 2016, p. 12). As such, p edis ibu ion is concep ualised as an economic
p ocess ha is ele an o mac o-le el inequali y. In he p esen pape , p edis ibu ion is depic ed as a p ocess in which an
indi idual’s disposable income is an ou come o hei ma ke income and edis ibu ion. Ma ke income e e s o p e- axes and
ans e s income om all sou ces (i.e. income om in es men s, p ope y en al, ea nings on in e es , employmen income, sel -
employmen income and pension paymen s). Disposable income e e s o pos - axes and ans e s income excluding consump ion
axes and public bene i s and edis ibu ion is he di e ence be ween ma ke income and disposable income. Agg ega ing he
indi iduals in a popula ion allows p edis ibu ion o be p esen ed as a p ocess ha gi es ise o disposable income inequali y as
shown in Figu e 2.3.1.
The Mac o-le el P ocess o P edis ibu ion
Sou ce: Au ho
The e iewed li e a u e sugges s he possibili y o a causal ela ionship be ween Equi y Belie s — de ined in his s udy as alue
judgmen s abou he ai ness o ma ke ou comes — and inequali y. Equi y Belie s may di e acco ding o pe sonal p e e ences o
income inequali y, by socioeconomic s a us and by o ganisa ional ole. Policymake s who balance he in e es s o mul iple
s akeholde s will ha e alues ha a e sensi i e o he public in e es , whils hose o i m manage s a e balanced by sha eholde s’
and employees’ powe esou ces (Ko pi, 2006). Expe imen al esea ch shows ha belie in a jus economic sys em educes
sensi i i y o inequali y, he eby unde mining collec i e mo i a ion o edis ibu i e ac ion (Gouda zi, Pliskin, Jos , & Knowles,
2020). As a esul , belie s ha no malize o jus i y inequali y may con ibu e o i s pe sis ence, ega dless o indi iduals’ s a ed
p e e ences. Hence, e en i indi iduals exp ess a e sion o income inequali y, a belie in he p e-eminence o p oduc i i y as he
objec i e o policy can lead o ising mac o-le el inequali y. Equi y Belie s a e hus expec ed o a ec income inequali y h ough
hei in luence on he policies o go e nmen and o ganisa ions.
The in luence o belie s on policy is e iden in s udies o he Uni ed S a es: Fong (2001) ound ha belie s abou equi y signi ican ly
a ec ed suppo o edis ibu ion, while Ke (2014) obse ed ha public suppo o wel a e spending in ou U.S. egions
inc eased alongside ising inequali y be ween 1970 and 2000.
A simila dynamic is isible in he ends o inequali y in he Eu opean Union o e 1989 o 2013. EU membe ship equi es
democ a ic go e nance, ha membe s ha e unc ioning ma ke economies and ha EU ules and egula ions a e adop ed as na ional
law. All membe s a es a e pa y o an Economic and Mone a y Union ha o ms he wo ld’s la ges ee ade bloc and wen y
membe s use a common cu ency
7
. EU wel a e s a es a e he e o e b oadly simila bo h economically and socially, in e ms o
employmen egula ion and social p o ec ions.
Figu e 2.3.2 shows household le el ends o he Gini coe icien o p e- axes and ans e s, o ma ke income inequali y
(𝐺𝑖𝑛𝑖_𝑚𝑘𝑡), pos axes and ans e s, o disposable income inequali y (𝐺𝑖𝑛𝑖_𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑝) and go e nmen edis ibu ion (𝑟𝑒𝑙_𝑟𝑒𝑑). The
a iable (𝐸035 + 𝐸037) is aken o ep esen mic o-le el iews on he equi abili y o ma ke ou comes, o “Equi y Belie s” in he
EU. The end da a is demeaned so ha ze o on he e ical axes indica es coun y-le el a e ages.
7
Sou ce: h ps://eu opean-union.eu opa.eu/index_en
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8731
Social policy and inequali y in he Eu opean Union
Sou ce: Au ho -gene a ed using da a desc ibed in Sec ion 3.
Low alues o Equi y Belie s indica e p e e ences o mo e equali y and o mo e go e nmen in e en ion o educe inequali y and
high alues indica e p e e ences o mo e inequali y and less go e nmen in e en ion o educe inequali y. Thus, low alues o
Equi y Belie s a e in e p e ed as pe cei ed inequi y o ma ke ou comes and high alues a e in e p e ed as pe cei ed equi y o
ma ke ou comes. Acco dingly, upwa d mo emen s o Equi y Belie s a e in esponse o cu en ma ke ou comes being pe cei ed
as equi able and downwa d mo emen s a e in esponse o pe cei ed inequi y.
Be ween 1989 and 2013, bo h ma ke income inequali y and disposable income inequali y inc eased bu he e is li le e idence o a
co ela ion be ween hese ends and Equi y Belie s. The igu e highligh s wo majo ecessions: he global ecession o 1991, which
be ween 1990 o 1995 coincided wi h inancial and exchange a e c ises in Eu ope (Kose, Sugawa a, & Te ones, 2020), and he
2008 inancial c isis. Du ing he 2008 ecession, Eu opean go e nmen s unde ook la ge-scale in e en ions o p e en he collapse
o banking ins i u ions and inancial sys ems, esul ing in sha p inc eases in public deb (Mon ani, 2011). A no able pa e n eme ges
du ing his pe iod: as inequali y ises, Equi y Belie s all alongside a educ ion in edis ibu ion. This sugges s ha he ecession
was pe cei ed as a pe iod o inequi y, wi h pe cep ions o ai ness g adually eco e ing in he pos - ecession pe iod.
These ends poin o a possible ela ionship be ween Equi y Belie s and he p ocess o p edis ibu ion, in which disposable income
inequali y is he esul o changes o ma ke income inequali y and edis ibu ion ha a e associa ed wi h Equi y Belie s. This
p oposi ion is illus a ed in Figu e 2.3.3 and o ms he basis o empi ically es able hypo heses abou he ela ionship be ween
mic o-le el belie s and mac o-le el income inequali y, as ou lined below.
Equi y Belie s and he P ocess o P edis ibu ion
Sou ce: Au ho
Hypo hesis 1: Equi y Belie s eme ge om expe iences o income inequali y.
The e ec o pas inequali y on belie s is implici in coun y-le el s udies ha ound inequali y a e sion ose in esponse o ising
inequali y (Ke , 2014; Lübke , 2004, 2007; McCall, 2013; Medgyesi, 2013; Suh cke, 2001). Addi ionally, Ande sen and Yaish
(2012) ound ha expe iences o economic inequali y had an endu ing e ec on a i udes o income inequali y in 20 ad anced
capi alis democ acies be ween 1992 and 1999.
Hypo hesis 2: Equi y Belie s exe a p edis ibu i e e ec on inequali y.
The p edis ibu i e e ec o belie s on inequali y is sugges ed whe e Kenwo hy and McCall (2008) obse ed ha conce n o e
inequali y in he Uni ed S a es ini ially ose wi h inc easing inequali y, bu ha a subsequen decline in a e sion o inequali y
occu ed alongside con inued ises in inequali y. Simila ly, (Ke , 2014) ound ising inequali y was accep ed on he basis o
di e ences be ween wo ke skillse s.
Ma ke income
inequali y
Disposable
income
inequali y
Policy
Redis ibu ion
Equi y Belie s
B
A

An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8732
Hypo hesis 3: Equi y Belie s mode a e disposable income inequali y.
The mode a ing e ec o belie s on disposable income inequali y is sugges ed whe e p e e ences o mo e equali y we e associa ed
wi h lowe measu ed inequali y (Mu hi & Tiongson, 2009), and whe e p e e ences o inequali y align wi h coun y le els o
inequali y (Ande sen & Yaish, 2012). Sepa a ely, Schmid (2012) no ed a “sa u a ion e ec ” in Eu opean coun ies, whe e
inc easing social spending led o less demand o edis ibu ion a e a ce ain le el was eached.
3 METHOD AND DATA
In he analysis and in e p e a ion o ime se ies da a, " he pas can a ec he u u e, bu no ice e sa" Woold idge (2016, p. 32).
Acco dingly, i Equi y Belie s and inequali y a e in a causal ela ionship, Figu e 3.1.1 illus a es he di ec ion o causali y, whe e 𝑡𝑛
ep esen s he yea o a gi en obse a ion.
The causal ela ionship be ween belie s and inequali y
Sou ce: Au ho
The e ec size o a eg ession pa ame e cons i u es a ce e is pa ibus index o he magni ude and di ec ion o a ela ionship be ween
mul iple p edic o a iables con olling o he in luence o o he a iables in he model (Aloe & Thompson, 2013). Because he
pa ial e ec size o one a iable in luences he size o ano he e ec , changing he ime pe iod o one o he a iables allows he
ela ionship be ween wo a iables o e ime o be analysed in a bi a ia e co ela ion analysis o hei e ec sizes.
The heo e ical ela ionship be ween Equi y Belie s and inequali y is hus modelled by eg essing 𝑡0 (i.e., “ ime ze o”) obse a ions
o Equi y Belie s, along wi h obse a ions o inequali y and policy ha in sepa a e eg essions a e sys ema ically a ied h ough
pe iods 𝑡−5 o 𝑡+5 in ela ion o he Equi y Belie s a iables a 𝑡0. By holding he Equi y Belie s a iables cons an in each eg ession,
hese unc ion as a “𝑡0 equi y benchma k” ha acili a es causal in e p e a ion o he ela ionship be ween Equi y Belie s and
inequali y o e ime. Subsequen ly, he ela i e magni udes o he eg ession pa ame e s a e co ela ed using Spea man’s ank
co ela ion coe icien .
8
The co ela ions a e pe o med sepa a ely o he ex pos and ex an e es ima es and compa ed. A s a is ically
signi ican co ela ion would sugges a ela ionship be ween he a iables as hei ela i e e ec s con e ge on, o di e ge away om
𝑡0. A s a is ically signi ican con e gence on 𝑡0 would indica e an in luence o pas inequali y on Equi y Belie s and a di e gence,
ha Equi y Belie s in luences u u e inequali y. This me hod o analysis a oids he di icul y in de e mining he iming o he e ec
o explana o y a iables in ime se ies eg ession ha Fö s e and Tó h (2015) has ound could obscu e long- unning ela ionships
in inequali y analyses.
Da a
The da a comp ise a longi udinal ime se ies cons uc ed om independen ly pooled c oss-sec ions ha co e s wen y-eigh
Eu opean Union (EU) coun ies om 1984 o 2018. Table 5.1.1 in he appendix lis s he a iables discussed he e, along wi h hei
desc ip i e s a is ics and he bi a ia e co ela ions o 𝑡0.
Income inequali y a iables
Fo his s udy, a summa y index o inequali y o he whole popula ion is used a bo h household le el and indi idual le el o
in es iga e he ela ionship be ween Equi y Belie s and inequali y. The Gini coe icien is one such measu e ha scales om ze o
o one, whe e ze o ep esen s comple e equali y and one, comple e inequali y. Household le el Gini coe icien da a is sou ced om
8
Pea son’s p oduc -momen co ela ion coe icien (Pea son’s ) assumes ha he da a a e no mally dis ibu ed, bu his
assump ion may no hold o he pai ed obse a ions. The e o e, Spea man’s ank co ela ion coe icien , a non-pa ame ic
al e na i e o Pea son’s (Mye s e al., 2010) is used o all co ela ion analyses.
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8733
he S anda dised Wo ld Income Inequali y Da abase (SWIID), which uses he Luxembou g Income S udy as he s anda d o
equi alized (squa e oo scale) household income ha is ob ained om ha monised mic oda a on labou income, capi al income and
a a ie y o o he a iables (Sol , 2016, 2019). Indi idual le el Gini coe icien da a is sou ced om he Wo ld Inequali y Da abase
(WID.wo ld, 2024). The WID colla es income da a om mul iple sou ces including na ional accoun s, su ey da a, iscal da a, and
weal h ankings ha is spli equally among household membe s o e wen y yea s o age. Inequali y measu es a e ob ained using
gene alized Pa e o in e pola ion ha p o ides mo e accu a e es ima es o he op hal o he dis ibu ion han o he commonly used
echniques (Blanche , Fou nie , & Pike y, 2022).
Equi y Belie s a iables
The belie s da a used in his s udy a e social su ey mic oda a agg ega es o coun ies o he Eu opean Union
9
. The Equi y Belie s
a iables a e sou ced om he Wo ld Values Su ey (WVS) and Eu opean Values Su ey (EVS). The a iable coded 𝐸035
ep esen s mic o-le el p e e ences o equali y e sus incen i es (o ewa ds), and 𝐸037 ep esen s iews on whe he go e nmen
should in e ene o educe le els o inequali y o i indi iduals’ socioeconomic posi ion is hei pe sonal esponsibili y. Bo h
a iables scale om one o en and hei sum is deemed a close app oxima ion o mic o-le el iews on he equi abili y o ma ke
ou comes. Coun y-le el Equi y Belie s da a a e calcula ed using obus measu es o cen al endency—Hube ’s M-es ima o and
Tukey’s biweigh —and ea ed as con inuous a iables. Su ey esponden s who epo on hei socioeconomic posi ion in he
dis ibu ion o income allows obse a ions o be sepa a ed by income e ciles. This u nishes obus es ima o s o he op, middle
and bo om o he dis ibu ion. Fu he de ails o he su ey mic o-da a esponse a es, and desc ip i e s a is ics a e p o ided in he
appendix.
Con ol a iables
Con ol a iables o coun y le el capi al and labou ma ke condi ions a e used in all eg essions o emo e hei e ec om he
e o e m. In he mode a ion analysis, hese se e as p oxies o na ional policy dimensions: economic policy (𝐸𝐹𝐼), p ope y igh s
(𝐸𝐹𝐼_𝑏), mone a y con ol (𝐸𝐹𝐼_𝑐) and in e na ional ade (𝐸𝐹𝐼_𝑑). The a iables 𝑖𝑟𝑟, 𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑠ℎ and 𝑒𝑚𝑝 a e ea ed as indica o s o
co po a e policy.
Es ima ion me hod
Feasible Gene alised Leas Squa es (FGLS) is ypically used o co ec o se ial au oco ela ion in he e o e ms. Howe e , since
he da a consis o independen ly pooled c oss-sec ions, se ial co ela ion ac oss obse a ions is no a conce n. Consequen ly, gi en
ha FGLS is biased, O dina y Leas Squa es (OLS) is employed as i emains he bes linea unbiased es ima o . To add ess esidual
he e oskedas ici y and au oco ela ion, Newey-Wes HAC s anda d e o s a e used. This may educe he s a is ical signi icance o
some es ima es (Woold idge, 2016). Ze o-o de (bi a ia e) co ela ions a e shown in he Appendix and con i m he absence o
pe ec collinea i y among he eg esso s.
Con olling o coun y-speci ic, ime-in a ian ixed e ec s (FE) helps mi iga e omi ed a iable bias. Howe e , FE es ima o s may
be o e ly conse a i e by igno ing c oss-coun y a ia ion in unobse ed, ime-cons an ac o s (Fö s e & Tó h, 2015). As an
al e na i e, andom e ec s (RE) es ima o s assume such unobse ed he e ogenei y is unco ela ed wi h he explana o y a iables
(Alde son & Nielsen, 2002; Nielsen & Alde son, 1995). To assess he e iciency o a RE es ima o o he da a o his s udy, a
Hausman (1978) speci ica ion es was conduc ed. The es esul s indica ed ha he FE es ima o is mo e sui able. Consequen ly,
all eg essions a e es ima ed using FE by applying OLS o ime-demeaned da a. An Augmen ed Dickey-Fulle es o he co e
a iables and policy a iables con i ms ha he da a ollows a s a iona y, weakly dependen ime se ies p ocess. This nega es he
equi emen o i s di e encing, and a de ending a iable is included in all eg essions o ci cum en a spu ious eg ession p oblem
(Woold idge, 2016). All models include con ol a iables, coun y and ime dummy a iables. S a is ical ou lie s a e iden i ied ia
s uden ised esiduals ha exceed 2.5 s anda d de ia ions, and hei in luence is con olled o ia an ou lie dummy a iable. To
educe he s anda d e o o eg ession and inc ease he p ecision o he es ima es, he eg ession da a is ans o med wi h a na u al
loga i hm, which is done p io o demeaning. In models ha con ain in e ac ion e ms, he o iginal a iables a e i s in e ac ed
be o e hey a e ans o med and demeaned.
Models
Each hypo hesis es is e alua ed using a sepa a e model. Fo hypo heses 1 and 2, he models include obse a ions om wo ime
pe iods, 𝑡 = 0 and 𝑡 = 𝑛. Hence, he eg ession es ima es cap u e cumula i e e ec s ha e lec he a e age impac o e he wo
pe iods. This modelling s a egy inc eases he numbe o obse a ions pe eg ession, enhances he deg ees o eedom, and
imp o es he p ecision o he es ima es, and in he co ela ion analyses i acili a es a con e gence o di e gence o he pai ed
obse a ions om 𝑡0.
9
The Uni ed Kingdom exi ed he Eu opean Union on 31 Janua y 2020 and is included in his analysis.
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8734
Hypo hesis 1: Equi y Belie s eme ge om expe iences o income inequali y.
A model is speci ied using Equi y Belie s as he dependen a iable o assess how disposable income inequali y and edis ibu ion
in e ac wi h Equi y Belie s o e ime. I s speci ica ion is p o ided in he appendix. The model pools obse a ions om wo ime
pe iods: a baseline obse a ion a 𝑡 = 0, and a second obse a ion 𝑡 = 𝑛, whe e, 𝑛 ∈ {−5,…, −1,1,…,5} and 𝑛 ≠ 0. In bo h cases,
he pe iod o Equi y Belie s emains ixed a 𝑡 = 0, while he independen a iables a y o e ime. A single coe icien is es ima ed
o each in e ac ion e m, which cap u es he a e age ma ginal e ec o inequali y o edis ibu ion when in e ac ed wi h Equi y
Belie s a 𝑡 = 0. The pa ame e es ima es a e hus in ela ion o a heo e ical 𝑡0 equi y benchma k. The model is speci ied as:
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐵𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑠
󰇘𝑖𝑡0= 𝜷
𝟏𝑮𝒊𝒏𝒊_𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒑
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝒏 × 𝑬𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝑩𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒆𝒇
󰇘𝒔𝒊𝒕𝟎 + 𝜷
𝟐𝒓𝒆𝒍_𝒓𝒆𝒅
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝒏 × 𝑬𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝑩𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒆𝒇𝒔
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝟎 + 𝜷
𝟑𝑮𝒊𝒏𝒊_𝒎𝒌𝒕
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝒏 +
𝛽
󰆹𝑘𝑋𝑖𝑘𝑡𝑛
Ten sepa a e eg essions a e es ima ed and a co ela ion analysis is pe o med o he eg ession coe icien s o compa e he pai ed
obse a ions’ ela ionship in he ex pos and ex an e pe iods
10
. The in e empo al co ela ion analysis is shown o he 𝑡0 equi y
benchma k, 𝐻𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑟_𝑎, in Figu e 3.4.1 o illus a e he mo emen s o he pai ed obse a ions. Panel A shows he co ela ion o 𝜷
𝟑
wi h he ela i e e ec o 𝜷
𝟏, Panel B he co ela ion o 𝜷
𝟑 wi h he ela i e e ec o 𝜷
𝟐, and Panel C he co ela ion o 𝜷
𝟑 wi h he
sum o he ela i e e ec s o 𝜷
𝟏 and 𝜷
𝟐. The eg ession da a is p o ided in Table 5.4.2 o he appendix.
Equi y Belie s model co ela ion analysis
ex pos
ex an e
ex pos
ex an e
ex pos
ex an e
1***
←
0.6
0.9*
←
0.7
1***
←
0.8
***p<0.001 | **p<0.01 |*p<0.05 |†p<0.10
The co ela ions show a s onge co ela ion in he ex pos pe iod o all pai ed obse a ions, which is in e p e ed as a con e gence
on he 𝑡0 equi y benchma k and a con i ma ion ha Equi y Belie s eme ge om p e ious le els o inequali y, o a e shaped by
expe iences o income inequali y.
Hypo hesis 2: Equi y Belie s exe a p edis ibu i e e ec on inequali y.
A model ep esen ing he p ocess o p edis ibu ion is speci ied wi h disposable income inequali y as he dependen a iable o
es ima e he e ec s o ma ke inequali y, edis ibu ion, and Equi y Belie s o e ime. The ull speci ica ion is p o ided in he
appendix.
As be o e, he model pools obse a ions om wo ime pe iods: a baseline obse a ion a 𝑡 = 0, and a second obse a ion 𝑡 = 𝑛,
whe e, 𝑛 ∈ {−5,…, −1,1,…,5} and 𝑛 ≠ 0. In bo h cases, he pe iod o Equi y Belie s emains ixed a 𝑡 = 0, while he independen
a iables a y o e ime. A single coe icien is es ima ed o each eg esso ha cap u es he a e age ma ginal e ec o ma ke
income inequali y, edis ibu ion and Equi y Belie s a 𝑡 = 0. The pa ame e es ima es a e hus in ela ion o a heo e ical 𝑡0 equi y
benchma k. The model is speci ied as:
𝐺𝑖𝑛𝑖_𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑝
󰇘𝑖𝑡𝑛 = 𝜷
𝟏𝑮𝒊𝒏𝒊_𝒎𝒌𝒕
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝒏 + 𝜷
𝟐𝒓𝒆𝒍_𝒓𝒆𝒅
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝒏 + 𝜷
𝟑𝑬𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝑩𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒆𝒇𝒔
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝟎 + 𝛽
󰆹𝑘𝑋𝑖𝑘𝑡𝑛
Ten sepa a e eg essions a e es ima ed and he magni udes o 𝜷
𝟏 and 𝜷
𝟐 ela i e o 𝜷
𝟑 a e co ela ed o compa e he ela ionship o
pai ed obse a ions in he ex pos and ex an e pe iods. This analysis is shown o he 𝑡0 equi y benchma k, 𝐻𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑟_𝑎 in Figu e 3.4.2
o illus a e he mo emen s o he pai ed obse a ions. Panel A shows he co ela ion o 𝜷
𝟑 wi h he ela i e e ec o 𝜷
𝟏, Panel B
he co ela ion o 𝜷
𝟑 wi h he ela i e e ec o 𝜷
𝟐, and Panel C he co ela ion o 𝜷
𝟑 wi h he sum o he ela i e e ec s o 𝜷
𝟏 and
𝜷
𝟐. The eg ession da a a e p o ided in Table 5.4.3 o he appendix.
10
This co ela es measu emen s o he in e ac ion e m pa ame e s agains a uni y, o cons an alue o he pa ame e o ma ke
income inequali y. The Ox o d English Dic iona y de ines uni y as: “A quan i y, magni ude, o subs ance ega ded as equi alen
o he numbe one in calcula ion, measu emen , o compa ison”.
A
B
C
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8735
P edis ibu ion model co ela ion analysis
ex pos
ex an e
ex pos
ex an e
ex pos
ex an e
0
→
1***
-0.4
→
-1***
0
→
1***
***p<0.001 | **p<0.01 |*p<0.05 |†p<0.10
These co ela ions show a s onge co ela ion in he ex an e pe iod o all pai ed obse a ions, which is in e p e ed as a di e gence
om he 𝑡0 equi y benchma k and a con i ma ion ha Equi y Belie s exe a p edis ibu i e e ec on inequali y.
Hypo hesis 3: Equi y Belie s mode a e disposable income inequali y.
Two sepa a e models a e speci ied using disposable income inequali y as he dependen a iable. The obse a ions o 𝑡 = +1 o
𝑡 = +5 a e pooled whils he pe iod o Equi y Belie s is ixed a 𝑡 = 0. Hence, he eg ession es ima es cap u e cumula i e e ec s
ha e lec he a e age es ima e o e ou pe iods in ela ion o a heo e ical 𝑡0 equi y benchma k. The models a e speci ied as:
Model A: 𝐺𝑖𝑛𝑖_𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑝
󰇘𝑖𝑡𝑛 = 𝐺𝑖𝑛𝑖_𝑚𝑘𝑡
󰇘𝑖𝑡𝑛 + 𝑟𝑒𝑙_𝑟𝑒𝑑
󰇘𝑖𝑡𝑛 + 𝜷
𝟏𝒑𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒄𝒚
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝒏 + 𝛽
󰆹𝑘𝑋𝑖𝑘𝑡𝑛
Model B: 𝐺𝑖𝑛𝑖_𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑝
󰇘𝑖𝑡𝑛 = 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑦
󰇘𝑖𝑡𝑛 + 𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐵𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑠
󰇘𝑖𝑡0+ 𝜷
𝟐(𝒑𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒄𝒚
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝒏 × 𝑬𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝑩𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒆𝒇𝒔
󰇘𝒊𝒕𝟎) + 𝛽
󰆹𝑘𝑋𝑖𝑘𝑡𝑛
In Model A, he policy a iable is analysed alongside ma ke income inequali y and edis ibu ion. In Model B, ma ke income
inequali y and edis ibu ion a e excluded because hese a iables con ain he in luence o Equi y Belie s on esou ce alloca ion in
u u e pe iods (𝑡𝑛), which makes Equi y Belie s' in e ac ion wi h policy i ele an in a eg ession ha includes ma ke income
inequali y and edis ibu ion as eg esso s.
Model A es ima es a policy e ec , and Model B an in e ac ion e ec ha measu es he impac o Equi y Belie s on policy. The
p oduc o hese pa ame e s ep esen s he p opo ion o he dependen a iable’s a iance explained by a change o one s anda d
de ia ion o hei join e ec
11
, which is e e ed o he e as he equi y e ec . The sum o he policy e ec and he equi y e ec is he
esidual policy e ec ha measu es policy e ec i eness whils accoun ing o he in luence o Equi y
Belie s.Policy e ec + Equi y e ec = Residual policy e ec
Policy e ec s and equi y e ec s a e in e p e ed on he basis ha 𝑡0 equi y benchma ks p ecede con empo aneous policy and
inequali y a iables in pe iods 𝑡𝑛. Policy e ec s may ei he inc ease o dec ease disposable income inequali y and equi y e ec s
may s eng hen, weaken o nega e policy e ec s (Ande sson, Cue o-Cazu a, & Nielsen, 2014). To illus a e how hese e ec s a e
calcula ed, Table 3.4.3 shows ha Equi y Belie s p oduces a esidual policy e ec (deno ed β' Policy) ha is signi ican ly weake
han he policy alone (Δ% = 86.96).
Compu ing Equi y e ec s, β' policy e ec s and Δβ Policy e ec s
The in e ac ion e ec indica es ha Equi y Belie s mode a es disposable income inequali y signi ican ly (𝑝 < 0.01). The sign o
he in e ac ion e ec is nega i e and opposed o he policy e ec so ha Equi y Belie s a enua es he policy e ec by 100% −
86 .96% = 13.04%.
11
Goodman’s (1960) calcula ion o unbiased s anda d e o s o p oduc e ms is used o ob ain Wald s a is ics and p- alues o he
join e ec . The s anda d e o o he join e ec is ob ained ia a pa ame ic es ha equi es he policy e ec , in e ac ion e ec
and equi y e ec o be no mally dis ibu ed. Fo his eason, a Shapi o-Wilk es es o non-no mali y o hese pa ame e s is
pe o med. Whe e e idence o non-no mali y is ound, his is indica ed in he esul s.
C
A
B
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8742
6 CONCLUSION
This pape e iews empi ical esea ch on he ela ionship be ween belie s and inequali y and inds ha cu en s udies sugges he
possibili y o a bidi ec ional causal ela ionship, in which ma ke ou comes in luence belie s abou inequali y, and hese belie s, in
u n, shape subsequen ma ke ou comes. Building on hese s udies, his pape analyses he ela ionship be ween alue judgmen s
abou he ai ness o ma ke ou comes, deno ed “Equi y Belie s” and ma ke ou comes in he con ex o “p edis ibu ion”, ha Jacob
Hacke loosely de ined as “ he way in which he ma ke dis ibu es i s ewa ds in he i s place” (2011, p. 35). An Equi y Theo y
o P edis ibu ion is p oposed ha leads o he ollowing p oposi ions: 1) Equi y Belie s eme ge om expe iences o income
inequali y; 2) Equi y Belie s exe a p edis ibu i e e ec on inequali y; 3) Equi y Belie s mode a e disposable income inequali y.
These p oposi ions a e examined empi ically and a e suppo ed h ough s a is ical analysis.
The indings o his s udy ca y signi ican heo e ical implica ions o ou unde s anding o income dis ibu ion. The neolibe al
ee-ma ke ideology iews e hical and poli ical conside a ions, and discussions o income dis ibu ion beyond he emi o he
scien i ic discipline o economics, and has become mo e in luen ial since he 1970s wi h economis s’ inc easing in luence on
go e nmen policy, business p axis and academia (Appelbaum, 2019; Da do & La al, 2013). Consequen ly, ques ions o income
dis ibu ion ha e o en been o e looked in economic esea ch (A kinson, 1997, 2001), and al hough economic policy plays a cen al
ole in shaping esou ce alloca ion (C uz e al., 2015, p. 50), i p io i ises economic g ow h o e income dis ibu ion. The impac o
his ideology is e lec ed in a ecen global wo k o ce su ey commissioned by he echnology co po a ion, Mic oso
16
, whe e in a
sample o 31,000 ull- ime wo ke s in 31 coun ies, “inc easing employee p oduc i i y” was anked highes among he an icipa ed
bene i s o adop ing a i icial in elligence echnologies a wo k (Mic oso , 2023). Economic heo y, he e o e, has p o ound
implica ions on belie s abou he equi abili y o ma ke ou comes and his s udy sugges s ha ising inequali y a coun y le el is a
leas pa ially due o he absence o eelings o inequi y being igge ed a he mic o-le el among economic agen s.
These indings ha e se e al policy implica ions. Fi s ly, socioeconomic s a us can in luence policy ou comes in ways ha may
exace ba e disposable income inequali y, pa icula ly when lowe socioeconomic g oups a e unde ep esen ed. Secondly, he
p io i iza ion o equali y o e equi y—as unde s ood in poli ical philosophy, whe e equi y emphasizes equal oppo uni y—may
inad e en ly in ensi y disposable income inequali y, e en when such policies a e pe cei ed as jus . Thi d, al hough UN Sus ainable
De elopmen Goal 10 has c ea ed a a ou able clima e o policy ac ion o educe inequali y, he chie di icul y in es ablishing
whe he o no execu i e pay is “ oo high”, is ha no ob ious benchma k exis s o his me ic (Hall, 2003). This a gumen is also
applicable o benchma ks o low pay. Acco dingly, e o s owa ds achie emen o UN SDG 10 may bene i om he de elopmen
o “equi y a ge s” o employmen income a ge s ha may se e as benchma ks o high e sus low pay. Such me ics may shape
pe cep ions o he ai ness o labou ma ke ou comes, he eby con ibu ing o he ad ancemen o UN Sus ainable De elopmen
Goal 10.
The scope o his s udy was in en ionally limi ed o coun ies o he Eu opean Union. Consequen ly, his pape is mos ele an o
EU policymake s who a e commi ed o he goal o educing income inequali y by 2030. Fu u e esea ch on mac o-le el equi y
benchma ks can ex end he geog aphical co e age o his analysis o include coun ies ou side o he Eu opean Union. The design
o i m-le el equi y a ge s ha a e conduci e o equali y a e an a enue o u he esea ch ha en ail he explica ion o jus i ying
p inciples o hei implemen a ion. Fu u e s udies may u he con ibu e o his s eam o esea ch by analysing he heo e ical
impac o a mo e equal dis ibu ion o employmen income on economic g ow h, and i s implica ions o public spending.
Finally, his pape has laid he ounda ion o an eme ging Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion, concep ualised as a dynamic equilib ium
be ween Equi y Belie s and ma ke ou comes in which Equi y Belie s a e an eceden , and causally connec ed o socie al income
inequali y. Following Weick (1995), hese w i ings a e p esen ed as heo y unde cons uc ion wi h an in i a ion o o he esea che s
o u he de elop wha may la e become s ong heo y.
REFERENCES
1) Adams, J. S. (1963). Towa ds an unde s anding o inequi y [Ame ican Psychological Associa ion doi:10.1037/h0040968].
Re ie ed
2) Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequi y In Social Exchange. In L. Be kowi z (Ed.), Ad ances in Expe imen al Social Psychology
(Vol. 2, pp. 267-299): Academic P ess.
3) Adams, J. S., & F eedman, S. (1976). Equi y Theo y Re isi ed: Commen s and Anno a ed Bibliog aphy. In L. Be kowi z
& E. Wals e (Eds.), Equi y Theo y: Towa d a Gene al Theo y o Social In e ac ion (Vol. 9, pp. 43-91). New Yo k:
Academic P ess.
4) Agle, B. R., Mi chell, R. K., & Sonnen eld, J. A. (1999). Who Ma e s o CEOs? An In es iga ion o S akeholde A ibu es
and Salience, Co po a e Pe o mance, and CEO Values. The Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 42(5), 507-525.
doi:10.2307/256973
16
The su ey was conduc ed in 2023 by an independen esea ch i m, Edelman Da a x In elligence.

An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8743
5) Ake lo , G. A. (1984). Gi Exchange and E iciency-Wage Theo y: Fou Views. The Ame ican Economic Re iew, 74(2),
79-83. Re ie ed om h p://www.js o .o g/s able/1816334
6) Alde son, A. S., & Nielsen, F. (2002). Globaliza ion and he g ea U- u n: Income inequali y ends in 16 OECD coun ies.
Ame ican Jou nal o Sociology, 107(5), 1244-1299+I. doi:10.1086/341329
7) Alesina, A., & Giuliano, P. (2011). P e e ences o Redis ibu ion. In J. Benhabib, A. Bisin, & M. O. Jackson (Eds.),
Handbook o Social Economics (Vol. 1, pp. 93-131): No h-Holland.
8) Aloe, A. M., & Thompson, C. G. (2013). The Syn hesis o Pa ial E ec Sizes. Jou nal o he Socie y o Social Wo k and
Resea ch, 4(4), 390-405. doi:10.5243/jssw .2013.24
9) Anand, S., & Segal, P. (2015). The Global Dis ibu ion o Income. In A. B. A kinson & F. Bou guignon (Eds.), Handbook
o Income Dis ibu ion (Vol. 2, pp. 937-979): Else ie .
10) Ande sen, R., & Yaish, M. (2012). Public Opinion on Income Inequali y in 20 Democ acies: The Endu ing Impac o
Social Class and Economic Inequali y. Re ie ed om h ps://EconPape s. epec.o g/RePEc:aia:ginidp:48
11) Ande sson, U., Cue o-Cazu a, A., & Nielsen, B. B. (2014). EDITORIAL: F om he Edi o s: Explaining in e ac ion
e ec s wi hin and ac oss le els o analysis. Jou nal o In e na ional Business S udies, 45(9), 1063-1071. Re ie ed om
h p://www.js o .o g/s able/43653837
12) And eß, H.-J., & Heien, T. (2001). Fou Wo lds o Wel a e S a e A i udes? A Compa ison o Ge many, No way, and he
Uni ed S a es. Eu opean Sociological Re iew, 17(4), 337-356. Re ie ed om h p://www.js o .o g/s able/522898
13) Appelbaum, B. (2019). The Economis s' Hou : False P ophe s, F ee Ma ke s, and he F ac u e o Socie y. Bos on, MA:
Li le, B own and Company.
14) A hu , J. B., He dman, A. O., & Yang, J. (2016). How Top Managemen HR Belie s and Values A ec High-Pe o mance
Wo k Sys em Adop ion and Implemen a ion E ec i eness. Human Resou ce Managemen , 55(3), 413-435.
doi:10.1002/h m.21672
15) A kinson, A. B. (1970). On he measu emen o inequali y. Jou nal o Economic Theo y, 2(3), 244-263.
doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/0022-0531(70)90039-6
16) A kinson, A. B. (1997). B inging Income Dis ibu ion in F om he Cold. The Economic Jou nal, 107(441), 297-321.
Re ie ed om h p://www.js o .o g/s able/2957944
17) A kinson, A. B. (2001). The S ange Disappea ance o Wel a e Economics. Kyklos, 54(2-3), 193-206.
doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1467-6435.00148
18) A kinson, A. B. (2015). Inequali y : wha can be done? Camb idge, MA: Ha a d Uni e si y P ess.
19) A kinson, A. B., Rainwa e , L., & Smeeding, T. M. (1995). Income Dis ibu ion in OECD Coun ies: The E idence om
he Luxembou g Income S udy (LIS). O ganiza ion o Economic Coope a ion and De elopmen , Pa is.
20) Basu, K. (1994). On In e pe sonal Compa ison and he Concep o Equali y. In W. Eichho n (Ed.), Models and
Measu emen o Wel a e and Inequali y (pp. 491-510). Be lin, Heidelbe g: Sp inge -Ve lag.
21) Beal, B. D., As akho a, M., & Conaway, R. N. (2017). Income inequali y and managemen heo y: Sys emic conside a ions
and causal pa hs. Academy o Managemen P oceedings, 2017(1), 12233. doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2017.186
22) Blanche , T., Fou nie , J., & Pike y, T. (2022). Gene alized Pa e o Cu es: Theo y and Applica ions. Re iew o Income
and Weal h, 68(1), 263-288. doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/ oiw.12510
23) Blekesaune, M. (2007). Economic Condi ions and Public A i udes o Wel a e Policies. Eu opean Sociological Re iew,
23(3), 393-403. doi:10.1093/es /jcm012
24) B ighouse, H., & Swi , A. (2006). Equali y, P io i y, and Posi ional Goods. E hics, 116(3), 471-497. doi:10.1086/500524
25) Bucca, M. (2016). Me i and blame in unequal socie ies: Explaining La in Ame icans’ belie s abou weal h and po e y.
Resea ch in Social S a i ica ion and Mobili y, 44, 98-112. doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j. ssm.2016.02.005
26) Bu ns ein, E., & Ka z, S. (1972). G oup decisions in ol ing equi able and op imal dis ibu ion o s a us. In C. G.
McClin ock (Ed.), Expe imen al social psychology (pp. 412-448). New Yo k: Hol , Rineha , & Wins on.
27) Cingano, F. (2014). T ends in Income Inequali y and i s Impac on Economic G ow h (Wo king Pape No. 163). Re ie ed
om Pa is: h ps://www.oecd-ilib a y.o g/con en /pape /5jx jncwx 6j-en
28) Cla k, A. E., & D'Amb osio, C. (2015). A i udes o Income Inequali y: Expe imen al and Su ey E idence. In A. B.
A kinson & F. Bou guignon (Eds.), Handbook o Income Dis ibu ion (Vol. 2, pp. 1147-1208): Else ie .
29) Cohen, J. (1988). S a is ical powe analysis o he beha io al sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: E lbaum.
30) Co e, J. E., & Guay, W. R. (2010). Is CEO Pay Too High and A e Incen i es Too Low? A Weal h-Based Con ac ing
F amewo k. Academy o Managemen Pe spec i es, 24(1), 5-19. Re ie ed om www.js o .o g/s able/25682380
31) C uz, M., Fos e , J., Quillin, B., & Schellekens, P. (2015). Ending Ex eme Po e y and Sha ing P ospe i y: P og ess and
Policies (PRN/15/03). Re ie ed om © Wo ld Bank, Washing on, DC: h p://hdl.handle.ne /10986/23604 License: CC
BY 3.0 IGO
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8744
32) Da do , P., & La al, C. (2013). The new way o he wo ld: On neolibe al socie y. (G. Ellio , T ans.). London, New Yo k:
Ve so Books.
33) de Chaumon , M. (2012, 25 June 2012). S udies ag ee a as income gap is bad o business. The Financial Times, p. 12.
Re ie ed om h ps://www. .com/con en /3545b130-b56 -11e1-ab92-00144 eabdc0
34) Du u-Bella , M., & Ten e , E. (2012). Who's o Me i oc acy? Indi idual and Con ex ual Va ia ions in he Fai h.
Compa a i e Educa ion Re iew, 56(2), 223-247. doi:10.1086/661290
35) Eynon, L. (2016, 15 May - 15 July). The B i ish Labou Pa y and he ‘New Economics’. Pape p esen ed a he Wo ld
Economics Associa ion (WEA) Con e ences, 2016.
36) Feh , E., & Schmid , K. M. (1999). A Theo y o Fai ness, Compe i ion, and Coope a ion. The Qua e ly Jou nal o
Economics, 114(3), 817–868. doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1162/003355399556151
37) Fong, C. (2001). Social p e e ences, sel -in e es , and he demand o edis ibu ion. Jou nal o Public Economics, 82(2),
225-246. doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/S0047-2727(00)00141-9
38) Fö s e , M. F., & Tó h, I. G. (2015). C oss-Coun y E idence o he Mul iple Causes o Inequali y Changes in he OECD
A ea. In A. B. A kinson & F. Bou guignon (Eds.), Handbook o Income Dis ibu ion (Vol. 2, pp. 1729-1843): Else ie .
39) Goodman, L. A. (1960). On he Exac Va iance o P oduc s. Jou nal o he Ame ican S a is ical Associa ion, 55(292), 708-
713. doi:10.2307/2281592
40) Gouda zi, S., Pliskin, R., Jos , J. T., & Knowles, E. D. (2020). Economic sys em jus i ica ion p edic s mu ed emo ional
esponses o inequali y. Na u e Communica ions, 11(1), 383. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-14193-z
41) G eenley, G. E., & Foxall, G. R. (1997). Mul iple S akeholde O ien a ion in UK Companies and he Implica ions o
Company Pe o mance. Jou nal o Managemen S udies, 34(2), 259-284. doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00051
42) Hacke , J. S. (2011). The Ins i u ional Founda ions o Middle-Class Democ acy. In P. Ne wo k (Ed.), P io i ies o a New
Poli ical Economy: Memos o he Le (pp. 33-38).
43) Hadle , M. (2005). Why Do People Accep Di e en Income Ra ios? A Mul i-le el Compa ison o Thi y Coun ies. Ac a
Sociologica, 48(2), 131-154. doi:10.1177/0001699305053768
44) Hall, B. J. (2003). Six Challenges in Designing Equi y-Based Pay. Jou nal o Applied Co po a e Finance, 15(3), 21-33.
doi:10.1111/j.1745-6622.2003. b00458.x
45) Hausman, J. A. (1978). Speci ica ion Tes s in Econome ics. Econome ica, 46(6), 1251-1271. doi:10.2307/1913827
46) Janmaa , J. G. (2013). Subjec i e Inequali y: a Re iew o In e na ional Compa a i e S udies on People’s Views abou
Inequali y. Eu opean Jou nal o Sociology / A chi es Eu opéennes de Sociologie, 54(3), 357-389.
doi:10.1017/S0003975613000209
47) Jansson, J., Nilsson, J., Modig, F., & Hed Vall, G. (2017). Commi men o Sus ainabili y in Small and Medium-Sized
En e p ises: The In luence o S a egic O ien a ions and Managemen Values. Business S a egy and he En i onmen ,
26(1), 69-83. doi:10.1002/bse.1901
48) Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value Maximiza ion, S akeholde Theo y, and he Co po a e Objec i e Func ion. Business E hics
Qua e ly, 12(2), 235-256. doi:10.2307/3857812
49) Jensen, M. C., & Mu phy, K. J. (1990, May-June). CEO Incen i es—I ’s No How Much You Pay, Bu How. Ha a d
Business Re iew. Re ie ed om h ps://hb .o g/1990/05/ceo-incen i es-i s-no -how-much-you-pay-bu -how
50) Kenwo hy, L., & McCall, L. (2008). Inequali y, public opinion and edis ibu ion. Socio-Economic Re iew, 6(1), 35-68.
doi:10.1093/se /mwm006
51) Ke , W. R. (2014). Income inequali y and social p e e ences o edis ibu ion and compensa ion di e en ials. Jou nal o
Mone a y Economics, 66, 62-78. doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2014.03.002
52) Ko pi, W. (2006). Powe Resou ces and Employe -Cen e ed App oaches in Explana ions o Wel a e S a es and Va ie ies
o Capi alism: P o agonis s, Consen e s, and An agonis s. Wo ld Poli ics, 58(2), 167-206. Re ie ed om
h p://www.js o .o g/s able/40060131
53) Kose, M. A., Sugawa a, N., & Te ones, M. E. (2020). Global Recessions: The Wo ld Bank.
54) Le en hal, G. S. (1976). The Dis ibu ion o Rewa ds and Resou ces in G oups and O ganiza ions. In L. Be kowi z & E.
Wals e (Eds.), Ad ances in expe imen al social psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 43-91). New Yo k: Academic P ess.
55) Lewis, M. K., & Mizen, P. D. (2000). Mone a y Economics. New Yo k: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
56) Lübke , M. (2004). Globaliza ion and pe cep ions o social inequali y. In e na ional Labou Re iew, 143(1-2), 91-128.
doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1564-913X.2004. b00547.x
57) Lübke , M. (2007). Inequali y and he demand o edis ibu ion: a e he assump ions o he new g ow h heo y alid?
Socio-Economic Re iew, 5(1), 117-148. doi:10.1093/se /mwl002
58) Mankiw, N. G., & Taylo , M. P. (2017). Economics (Fou h ed.). Ando e : Annabel Ainscow.
59) McCall, L. (2013). The Undese ing Rich: Ame ican Belie s abou Inequali y, Oppo uni y, and Redis ibu ion.
Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8745
60) Medgyesi, M. (2013). Inc easing income inequali y and a i udes o inequali y: a coho pe spec i e. Re ie ed om
Ams e dam:
h ps://www. esea chga e.ne /publica ion/312266723_Inc easing_income_inequali y_and_a i udes_ o_inequali y_a_coh
o _pe spec i e
61) Mic oso . (2023). 2023 Wo k T end Index: Annual Repo . Re ie ed om online: h ps://www.mic oso .com/en-
us/wo klab/wo k- end-index/will-ai- ix-wo k?cul u e=en-gb&coun y=gb
62) Mijs, J. J. B. (2021). The pa adox o inequali y: income inequali y and belie in me i oc acy go hand in hand. Socio-
Economic Re iew, 19(1), 7-35. doi:10.1093/se /mwy051
63) Mijs, J. J. B., & Sa age, M. (2020). Me i oc acy, Eli ism and Inequali y. The Poli ical Qua e ly, 91(2), 397-404.
doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1467-923X.12828
64) Milano ic, B. (2004). Why We All Do Ca e Abou Inequali y (Bu a e Loa h o Admi i ). Social Science Resea ch
Ne wo k. doi:h p://dx.doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.530363
65) Mon ani, G. (2011). Money and Finance as Global Public Goods: Con ibu ion o a Sup ana ional Mac oeconomic Theo y.
SAGE Open, 1(3), 2158244011424175. doi:10.1177/2158244011424175
66) Mo elli, S., Smeeding, T., & Thompson, J. (2015). Pos -1970 T ends in Wi hin-Coun y Inequali y and Po e y: Rich and
Middle-Income Coun ies. In A. B. A kinson & F. Bou guignon (Eds.), Handbook o Income Dis ibu ion (Vol. 2, pp. 593-
696): Else ie .
67) Mu hi, M., & Tiongson, E. R. (2009). A i udes o Equali y: The Socialis Legacy Re isi ed. Compa a i eEconomic
S udies, 51(3), 344-336.
68) Mye s, J. L., Well, A. D., Lo ch J , R. F., Woolley, T., Kimmins, S., Ha ison, R., & Ha ison, P. (2010). Mo e Abou
Co ela ion. In Resea ch Design and S a is ical Analysis (3 d ed.). London, UK: Taylo & F ancis G oup.
69) Neal, D., & Rosen, S. (2000). Theo ies o he dis ibu ion o ea nings. In A. B. A kinson & F. Bou guignon (Eds.),
Handbook o Income Dis ibu ion (Vol. 1, pp. 379-427): Else ie .
70) Nielsen, F., & Alde son, A. S. (1995). Income Inequali y, De elopmen , and Dualism: Resul s om an Unbalanced C oss-
Na ional Panel. Ame ican Sociological Re iew, 60(5), 674-701. doi:10.2307/2096317
71) ONS. (2023). Income and ea nings s a is ics guide. Re ie ed om ONS:
h ps://www.ons.go .uk/employmen andlabou ma ke /peopleinwo k/ea ningsandwo kinghou s/me hodologies/aguide os
ou ceso da aonea ningsandincome
72) Pasko , M., & Dewilde, C. (2012). Income inequali y and solida i y in Eu ope. Resea ch in Social S a i ica ion and
Mobili y, 30(4), 415-432. doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j. ssm.2012.06.002
73) Picke , K., Gauha , A., Wilkinson, R., & Sahni-Nicholas, P. (2024). The Spi i Le el a 15: The Endu ing Impac o
Inequali y. Re ie ed om The Equali y T us : h ps://equali y us .o g.uk/e idence-base/ he-spi i -le el-a -15/
74) Pie son, C. (2016). Book Re iew. [The P edis ibu ion Agenda: Tackling Inequali y and Suppo ing Sus ainable G ow h,
Claudia Chwalisz and Pa ick Diamond (eds)]. Poli ical S udies Re iew, 15(1), 86-86. doi:10.1177/1478929916676922
75) Rehm, P. (2009). Risks and Redis ibu ion: An Indi idual-Le el Analysis. Compa a i e Poli ical S udies, 42(7), 855-881.
doi:10.1177/0010414008330595
76) Rod ik, D. (1998). Why do Mo e Open Economies Ha e Bigge Go e nmen s? Jou nal o Poli ical Economy, 106(5), 997-
1032. doi:10.1086/250038
77) Schein, E. H. (1990). O ganiza ional Cul u e. Ame ican Psychologis , 45(2), 109-119.
78) Schein, E. H. (2010). O ganiza ional Cul u e and Leade ship (Fou h ed.). San F ancisco: Jossey-Bass.
79) Schmid , A. (2012). The De elopmen o Public Demand o Redis ibu ion: A Pseudo-Panel Model o Decomposing
Wi hin- and Be ween-E ec s. GK SOCLIFE. Uni e si y o Cologne. Re ie ed om h p://www.schmid -
ca an.de/Schmid _2012.pd
80) Sen, A. (2000). Social jus ice and he dis ibu ion o income. In A. B. A kinson & F. Bou guignon (Eds.), Handbook o
Income Dis ibu ion (Vol. 1, pp. 59-85): Else ie .
81) Senik, C. (2009). Income Dis ibu ion and Subjec i e Happiness : A Su ey. OECD Social, Employmen and Mig a ion
Wo king Pape s, No. 96. doi:doi.o g/10.1787/218860720683
82) Shapi o, C., & S igli z, J. E. (1984). Equilib ium Unemploymen as a Wo ke Discipline De ice. The Ame ican Economic
Re iew, 74(3), 433-444. Re ie ed om h p://www.js o .o g/s able/1804018
83) Sjöbe g, O. (2008). Co po a e Go e nance and Ea nings Inequali y in he OECD Coun ies 1979–2000. Eu opean
Sociological Re iew, 25(5), 519-533. doi:10.1093/es /jcn069
84) Sol , F. (2016). The S anda dized Wo ld Income Inequali y Da abase*. Social Science Qua e ly, 97(5), 1267-1281.
doi:10.1111/ssqu.12295
85) Sol , F. (2019). The S anda dized Wo ld Income Inequali y Da abase, Ve sions 8-9. Re ie ed om:
h ps://doi.o g/10.7910/DVN/LM4OWF
An Equi y Theo y o P edis ibu ion
IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 11 No embe 2025 www.ijssh .in Page 8746
86) Suh cke, M. (2001). P e e ences o inequali y: Eas s. Wes . HWWA Discussion Pape , No. 150. Re ie ed om
h p://hdl.handle.ne /10419/19401
87) T apezniko a, I. (2019). Measu ing income inequali y. IZA Wo ld o Labo , 462. doi:10.15185/izawol.462
88) UN. (2021). The Sus ainable De elopmen Goals Repo 2021. Re ie ed om New Yo k: Uni ed Na ions Publica ions:
h ps://uns a s.un.o g/sdgs/ epo /2021/
89) Weick, K. E. (1995). Wha Theo y is No , Theo izing Is. Adminis a i e Science Qua e ly, 40(3), 385-390.
doi:10.2307/2393789
90) WID.wo ld. (2024). Wo ld Inequali y Da abase. Re ie ed om h ps://wid.wo ld/da a/. Re ie ed 04 Augus 2024, om
The Wo ld Inequali y Lab h ps://wid.wo ld/da a/
91) Wilkinson, R. G., & Picke , K. (2009). The Spi i Le el: Why G ea e Equali y Makes Socie ies S onge . New Yo k:
Bloomsbu y P ess.
92) Woold idge, J. M. (2016). In oduc o y Econome ics : a mode n app oach (Six h ed.). Bos on, MA: Cengage Lea ning.
93) Wo ld Bank. (2005). Wo ld De elopmen Repo 2006: Equi y and De elopmen . New Yo k: Wo ld Bank/Ox o d
Uni e si y P ess.
94) Wo ld Bank. (2023). T ade (% o GDP). Re ie ed om h ps://da abank.wo ldbank.o g/ epo s.aspx?sou ce=wo ld-
de elopmen -indica o s. Re ie ed 14 Augus 2023, om The Wo ld Bank
h ps://da abank.wo ldbank.o g/ epo s.aspx?sou ce=wo ld-de elopmen -indica o s
95) Ye gle , J. D. (2012). Re iew a icle. [O ganiza ional Cul u e and Leade ship, 4 h ed. Schein (2010)]. Leade ship &
O ganiza ion De elopmen Jou nal, 33(4), 421-423. doi:10.1108/01437731211229331
The e is an Open Access a icle, dis ibu ed unde he e m o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion – Non Comme cial 4.0 In e na ional (CC BY-NC 4.0)
(h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which pe mi s emixing, adap ing and
building upon he wo k o non-comme cial use, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.