Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, is already up and running.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: RE: Income distribution

From   Austin Nichols <>
Subject   Re: st: RE: Income distribution
Date   Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:56:28 -0500

Abdel Rahmen El Lahga <> :
I would recommend instead avoiding the lognormal distribution, and
stick with Dagum or Singh-Maddala.
To quote from the paper you mentioned:
"The most surprising the fact that the Stage II
adjustment to the synthetic sample does not always improve the
accuracy of the estimate of  inequality. Indeed, for the Singh-Maddala
and Generalized Beta distributions, the adjustment raises the mean
absolute percentage error...."

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Abdel Rahmen El Lahga
<> wrote:
> Hmm,
> Unfortunately, it seems that most of the fitted functions, using
> grouped data, are unreliable ,
> i.e., they often produce summary statistics which are very different
> from those obtained from individual micro data.
> I suggest the procedure proposed recently  by Shorrocks and Wan (2008)
> ( Ungrouping Income Distributions: Synthesising Samples for Inequality
> and Poverty Analysis: wider discussion paper no 16 ) which can be
> downloded at
> roughly  the approach of Shorrocks and Wan fits any chosen
> distribution to grouped data to produce a sample of N observation then
> they propose a second stage of adjustement until that characteristics
> of the generated sample exactly match the reported grouped values. The
> simulated data can then be used to estimate various inequality and
> poverty measure.
> The DASP package of Araar and Duclos contains a ready Stata routile
> that apply such procedure
> DASP can be downloeded at
> AbdelRahmen

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index