Threshold Effects of Government Size on Happiness Inequality in Iran

Subject Areas : Labor and Demographic Economics

Ebrahim Zare ¹ ( Ph. D student, Department of Economics, College of Economics and Management, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran. )
mehrzad ebrahimi ² ( Assistant Professor and Faculty Member, Department of Economics, College of Economics and Management, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran. )
Abbas Aminifard ³ ( Assistant Professor and Faculty Member, Department of Economics, College of Economics and Management, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran. )
Hashem Zare ⁴ ( Assistant Professor and Faculty Member, Department of Economics, College of Economics and Management, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran. )

Received: 2019-12-25 Accepted : 2021-06-08 Published : 2021-02-19

Keywords: Iranian Economy, Threshold Regression, Happiness Inequality, JEL Classification: H11, I31, C24, O53. Keywords: Government Size,

Abstract :

Happiness and happiness inequality are important issues that economists have been studying in recent years. However, studies addressing the inequality of happiness are limited, and more research is needed to shed light on its antecedents and mechanism. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between government size and happiness inequality in the Iranian economy using a threshold regression model during the period of 1974-2016. The results of the estimation of research models show that the size of the government has a threshold effect on happiness inequality. In other words, before the threshold of 13 percent of the government-to-GDP ratio, the government size has a diminutive effect on the inequality of happiness, but after passing through the threshold and increasing the government's involvement in the economy, this variable has a significant positive effect on the happiness inequality. Thus, the expansion of the size of government in the Iranian economy has exacerbated the happiness gap between the low-income and high-income classes of society. Based on the research results, it is suggested that policymakers pay attention to the threshold relationship between government size and inequality of happiness of society when implementing their policies.

References:

منابع

-        پتانلار، سعید کریمی، نادمی، یونس، زبیری، هدی (1394). اندازه دولت و بیکاری در اقتصاد ایران، فصلنامه علمی پژوهش‌های رشد و توسعه اقتصادی، 5(18): 64-51.

-        پناهی، حسین، رفاعی، رامیار (1390). تاثیر اندازه دولت بر رشد اقتصادی در ایران با تاکید بر مدل آرمی، فصلنامه علمی مدل‌سازی اقتصادی، 6(18): 123-138.

-        جلیلی کامجو، سید پرویز، نادمی، یونس (1398). ارزیابی رابطه بین نابرابری درآمد و نابرابری شادی، مطالعه موردی: ایران. فصلنامه سیاست‌گذاری اقتصادی، 11(21): 77-101.

-        رضایی، اسعدالله، حسین‌زاده، جواد، فرامرزی، ایوب، یزدان‌خواه، منصوره (1392). تأثیر اندازه دولت بر توزیع درآمد در ایران، 1(4): 21-36.

-        زارع، ابراهیم، زارع، هاشم (1396). بررسی رابطه غیرخطی فقر و اندازه دولت در اقتصاد ایران با استفاده از روش رگرسیون آستانه‌ای . فصلنامه سیاست‌های مالی و اقتصادی، ۵ (۲۰): 77-95.

-        سامانی‌پور، حسن؛ ابونوری، اسمعیل، نادمی، یونس (1395). تورم و اندازه دولت در ایران: رویکرد رگرسیون آستانه‌ای، فصلنامه پژوهش‌های اقتصادی، 16(4): 107-125.

-        فتاحی، شهرام، کرمی، جهانگیر، پرنیان طیبه (1398). بررسی رابطه‌ میانگین شادی و نابرابری شادی در کشورهای عضو منا، همایش ملی اقتصاد، مدیریت توسعه و کارآفرینی با رویکرد حمایت از کالای ایرانی، زاهدان، سازمان مدیریت صنعتی نمایندگی سیستان و بلوچستان، قابل دسترس در سایت: https://www.civilica.com/Paper

-        کمیجانی، اکبر، نظری، روح‌اله (1388). تأثیر اندازه دولت بر رشد اقتصادی در ایران، فصلنامه پژوهش‌های اقتصادی، 9 (3): 1-28.

-        نادمی، یونس، جلیلی کامجو، سید پرویز (1397). ارزیابی تاثیر فقر مطلق و نسبی بر نابرابری شادی در ایران. فصلنامه علمی مدل‌سازی اقتصادی، 12(41): 1-26.

-        نادمی، یونس و حسنوند، داریوش (1394). اثرات آستانه‌ای اندازه دولت بر نابرابری توزیع درآمد در ایران. فصلنامه برنامه‌ریزی و بودجه، ۲۰ (۳): ۱۲۵-۱۴۳.

-         Abounoori, E., & Nademi, Y. (2010). Government size threshold and economic growth in Iran.‏ International Journal of Business and Development Studies, 2(1): 95-108.

-         Afonso, A., Schuknecht, L., & Tanzi, V. (2010). Income distribution determinants and public spending efficiency. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 8(3): 367-389.

-         Alois, P. (2014). Income inequality and happiness: Is there a relationship? Working Paper.

-         Armey, R. K. (1995). The freedom revolution: The new republican house majority leader tells why big government failed, why freedom works, and how we will rebuild America. Regnery Publishing.

-         Barro, R. J. (1990). Government spending in a simple model of endogeneous growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5, Part 2): 103-125.

-         Chin-Hon-Foei, S. (1989). Life satisfaction in the EC countries, 1975-1984, In: Veenhoven, R., and Ed: Did the crisis really hurt? Universitaire Pers Rotterdam, 1989, Netherlands, 24 – 43.

-         Cummins, R.A. (2003). Normative life-satisfaction: Measurement issues and a homeostatic model. Social Indicators Research, 64: 225 – 256.

-         Fahey, T. & Smyth, E. (2003). What can subjective indicators tell us about inequalities in welfare? Evidence from 33 European societies Working paper, Dublin, Economic and Social Research Institute, 2003.

-         Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2012). The use of happiness research for public policy. Social choice and welfare, 38(4): 659-674.

-         Hansen, B. E. (1992). The likelihood ratio test under nonstandard conditions: Testing the Markov switching Model of GNP. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 7(1): 61-82.

-         Hansen, B. E. (1999). Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference. Journal of Econometrics, 93(2): 345-368.‏

-         Kollamparambil, U. (2019). Happiness, happiness inequality and income dynamics in South Africa. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1-22.

-         Nademi, Y., Winker, P. (2020). Non-Linear effects of government size on inflation in OPEC Countries: A threshold panel approach. Iranian Economic Review, DOI: 10.22059/ier.2020.77970.

-         Niimi, Y. (2018). What affects happiness inequality? Evidence from Japan. Journal of Happiness Studies, 19(2): 521-543.

-         Samimi, A. J., Nademi, Y., & Zobeiri, H. (2010). Government size & Economic Growth: A threshold regression approach in selected Islamic countries. Australian Journal of Basic and applied sciences, 4(8): 2247-2249.

-         Stevenson, B., & Wolfers, J. (2008). Happiness inequality in the United States. The Journal of Legal Studies, 37(S2): 33-79.

-         Sylwester, K. (2002). Can education expenditures reduce income inequality? Economics of Education Review, 21(1): 43-52.

-         Veenhoven, R. & Ehrhardt, J. (1995). The cross-national pattern of happiness; Test of predictions implied in three theories of happiness, Social Indicators Research, 34: 33 – 68.

-                           , R. & Kalmijn, W.M. (2005) Inequality-Adjusted Happiness in Nations, Journal of Happiness Studies, 6:421-455.

-                           , R. (1990). Inequality in happiness, inequality in countries compared between countries, Paper 12th Work Congress of Sociology, Madrid, Spain.

-                           , R. (2000). Well-being in the welfare state: Level not higher, distribution not more equitable, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 2: 91 – 125.

-                            , R. (2004). World database of happiness: Continuous register of research on subjective enjoyment of life. Available at the website of Erasmus University Rotterdam in the Netherlands.

-                            , R. (2005). Return of inequality in modern society? Test by dispersion of life-satisfaction across time and nations, Journal of Happiness Studies, 6: 457-487.

-                             , R. (2005). Inequality of happiness in Nations, Introduction to this special issue, Journal of Happiness Studies, 6: 351-355.