DOCSLIB.ORG

Mexico: a Decade of Falling Inequality: Market Forces Or State Action? Gerardo Esquivel, Nora Lustig, and John Scott

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mexico: a Decade of Falling Inequality: Market Forces Or State Action? Gerardo Esquivel, Nora Lustig, and John Scott 07-0410-2 CH 7:Cohen-Easterly 3/17/10 8:47 PM Page 175 7 Mexico: A Decade of Falling Inequality: Market Forces or State Action? gerardo esquivel, nora lustig, and john scott exico is among the most unequal countries in the world.1 However, it is Mmaking progress in becoming less unequal: from 1996 to 2006, Mexico’s Gini coefficient fell from 0.543 to 0.498 (or by 0.8 percent a year),2 and from 2000 to 2006 it fell by 1 percent a year.3 The decline in inequality coincided with 1. The authors are grateful to participants in the UNDP project “Markets, the State, and the Dynam- ics of Inequality in Latin America,” coordinated by Nora Lustig and Luis Felipe López Calva, as well as to participants in seminars at the United Nations offices in New York and Mexico City, the Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association meeting in Rio de Janeiro, and the Latin American Studies Associa- tion meeting in Rio de Janeiro. We also are very grateful to Mary Kwak and anonymous reviewers for their very useful comments and suggestions and to Fedora Carbajal as well as Edith Cortés, Francisco Islas, and Mariellen Malloy Jewers for their outstanding research assistance. 2. The Gini reported in this paragraph is calculated by using total income (which includes monetary income and nonmonetary income, such as the imputed value of owner-occupied housing and auto- consumption, but does not include capital gains). The decomposition of income inequality by source pre- sented in this chapter uses current monetary income (which excludes capital gains and nonmonetary income). The income concept in both cases is assumed to be after monetary transfers, direct taxes, and social security contributions (that is, it is disposable income). For the incidence analysis, the income concept used to rank households is total current income (including nonmonetary income but excluding capital gains) per capita before transfers and indirect taxes but net of direct taxes, as reported in ENIGH, the National Survey of Household Income and Expenditures (see INEGI, various years). The same concept is used for market income when comparing the distribution of total transfers and taxes with market income (to estimate incidence and change in inequality), except that market income in this case is net of all taxes, not just direct taxes. 3. The change in the Gini coefficient between 1996 and 2006, 1996 and 2000, and 2000 and 2006 was found to be statistically significant at the 95 percent level. The confidence intervals were constructed 175 07-0410-2 CH 7:Cohen-Easterly 3/17/10 8:47 PM Page 176 176 gerardo esquivel, nora lustig, and john scott important changes in Mexico’s economic and social policy. In 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with the United States and Canada went into effect, thereby establishing the largest free trade area in the world—and the most asymmetrical in terms of the countries’ relative GDP.4 Mexico also implemented two important government transfer programs: Procampo in 1994 and Progresa (later called Oportunidades) in 1997. Procampo is an income sup- port program for farmers designed to help them face the transition costs resulting from the opening of agricultural trade under NAFTA. Progresa/Oportunidades is a targeted conditional cash transfer program; it is considered Mexico’s most im - portant antipoverty program. The period of declining inequality, which coincided with the period in which NAFTA went into effect, saw significant variation in annual growth rates. The peso crisis that began in December 1994 led to a sharp decline in economic activ- ity during 1995, when per capita GDP fell to the tune of 8 percent.5 The econ- omy recovered quickly, and between 1996 and 2000 Mexico’s per capita GDP grew at a rate of 4 percent a year. However, between 2000 and 2006, per capita GDP growth slowed to 1 percent a year. That low-growth period is precisely when income inequality started to decline more rapidly. This chapter uses nonparametric decomposition methods to analyze the prox- imate determinants of the reduction in income inequality between the mid-1990s and 2006. In particular, it looks at the roles played by the reduction in both labor income inequality and nonlabor income inequality. It also analyzes the impact of changes in demographics, such as the numbers of adults and of working adults per household. The chapter examines the extent to which the reduction in labor income inequality was due to a decline in the wage skill premium and explores the influence of changes in labor force composition, in terms of education and experience, on the decline in the wage skill premium; it also examines the rela- tionship between labor force composition and changes in public spending on education.6 It then analyzes the contribution of changes in government transfers, with particular emphasis on Progresa/Oportunidades, to the reduction in nonla- bor income inequality. The chapter concludes with a look at the distributive impact of government redistributive spending and taxes using standard incidence analysis. by applying the bootstrap method with 150 replications. There is Lorenz dominance for the comparisons of 2006 and 1996, 2006 and 2000, and 2000 and 1996. 4. See Tornell and Esquivel (1997) for more details on these issues. 5. For an analysis of the peso crisis, see Lustig (1998). 6. For a theoretical discussion of the relationship between educational expansion, the supply of skills, and labor earnings inequality see, for example, chapter 2, by Jaime Kahhat, in this volume. 07-0410-2 CH 7:Cohen-Easterly 3/17/10 8:47 PM Page 177 mexico: a decade of falling inequality 177 Income Inequality after NAFTA: 1994–2006 In this chapter we use the Gini coefficient as our preferred measure of inequality.7 It has all the desirable properties of an inequality indicator,8 and it is decompos- able by proximate determinants as well as income sources.9 Our analysis uses both total income per capita and total monetary income per capita.10 All of our esti- mates use information from the National Survey of Household Income and Expenditures (ENIGH).11 Comparable surveys are available for the years 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2005, and 2006.12 The surveys capture income net of taxes and contributions to social security and include transfers from Pro- campo and Progresa/Oportunidades. Figure 7-1 shows the evolution of the Gini coefficient for 1984–2006, using alternative definitions of income. The figure clearly indicates an inverted-U pat- tern with its peak in the mid-1990s. After rising by several percentage points between the mid-1980s and mid-1990s, the Gini coefficient for total household per capita income declined from 0.543 to 0.498 (and the Gini for monetary household per capita income declined from 0.539 to 0.506) between 1996 and 2006. The pace of decline accelerated between 2000 and 2006, when the Gini fell at 1 percent a year. Other measures of inequality follow the same general trend as the Gini coefficient, although some differences arise from the fact that the Gini is more sensitive to what happens to the middle of the distribution while the other measures are more heavily influenced by changes at the top and the bottom.13 For example, although the other measures tend to peak around 1998, the Gini peaks in 1994.14 7. Other measures of inequality such as the Theil index show trends similar to those described in the text. They are available from the authors on request. 8. These principles are: adherence to the Pigou-Dalton transfer principle; symmetry; independence of scale; homogeneity; and decomposability. 9. Although it is not additively decomposable, as is the Theil index. 10. Income includes labor income and nonlabor income. The former includes all the income that is reported as labor income in ENIGH, including labor income of the self-employed. Nonlabor income includes income from own businesses; income from assets (including capital gains), pensions (public and private), public tranfers (Oportunidades and Procampo), and private transfers (for example, remittances); and nonmonetary income (imputed rent on owner-occupied housing and consumption of own production, common in poor rural areas). Official poverty measures in Mexico use net current income—that is, capital gains, gifts, and in-kind transfers to other households subtracted from current total income. Current mon- etary income, the concept used in the decomposition of inequality by source presented below, does not include nonmonetary income and consumption of own production and excludes capital gains. 11. In Spanish, Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y Gastos de los Hogares (ENIGH). 12. Surveys for 1984 and 1989 are not as comparable, but they are still used for lack of a better alternative. 13. Sen and Foster (1973). 14. See Esquivel (2008). 07-0410-2 CH 7:Cohen-Easterly 3/17/10 8:47 PM Page 178 178 gerardo esquivel, nora lustig, and john scott Figure 7-1. Gini Coefficients for Alternative Income Definitions, 1984–2006a Gini coefficient 0.58 0.56 0.54 0.52 0.50 0.48 1984 1989 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Current Monetary Income (CMI) Labor Income CMI w/o Transfers CMI w/o Remmitances Current Total Income Source: Esquivel (2008). a. Current income excludes capital gains and income from the sale of durable goods. The evolution of Mexico’s income distribution can also be analyzed by using the growth incidence curves (GICs) suggested by Ravallion and Chen.15 These curves show the percent change in per capita income along the entire income distribution between two points in time. Figure 7-2 shows the GIC for 1996– 2006, 1996–2000, and 2000–06, constructed using total per capita income.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Did NAFTA Help Mexico? an Update After 23 Years
    CEPR CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND POLICY RESEARCH Did NAFTA Help Mexico? An Update After 23 Years By Mark Weisbrot, Lara Merling, Vitor Mello, Stephan Lefebvre, and Joseph Sammut* Updated March 2017 Center for Economic and Policy Research 1611 Connecticut Ave. NW tel: 202-293-5380 Suite 400 fax: 202-588-1356 Washington, DC 20009 http://cepr.net Mark Weisbrot is Co-Director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) in Washington, DC. Lara Merling is a Research Assistant, Vitor Mello is an International Program Intern, Stephan Lefebvre is a former Research Assistant, and Joseph Sammut is a former International Program Intern at CEPR. Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Income and Growth .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Agriculture and Employment ......................................................................................................................... 14 Economic Policy and Mexican Integration with the United States Economy ....................................... 16 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................ 21 References ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Giant Sucking Sound: Did NAFTA Devour the Mexican Peso?
    J ULY /AUGUST 1996 Christopher J. Neely is a research economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Kent A. Koch provided research assistance. This article examines the relationship The Giant between NAFTA and the peso crisis of December 1994. First, the provisions of Sucking Sound: NAFTA are reviewed, and then the links between NAFTA and the peso crisis are Did NAFTA examined. Despite a blizzard of innuendo and intimation that there was an obvious Devour the link between the passage of NAFTA and Mexican Peso? the peso devaluation, NAFTA’s critics have not been clear as to what the link actually was. Examination of their argu- Christopher J. Neely ments and economic theory suggests two possibilities: that NAFTA caused the Mex- t the end of 1993 Mexico was touted ican authorities to manipulate and prop as a model for developing countries. up the value of the peso for political rea- A Five years of prudent fiscal and mone- sons or that NAFTA’s implementation tary policy had dramatically lowered its caused capital flows that brought the budget deficit and inflation rate and the peso down. Each hypothesis is investi- government had privatized many enter- gated in turn. prises that were formerly state-owned. To culminate this progress, Mexico was preparing to enter into the North American NAFTA Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with NAFTA grew out of the U.S.–Canadian Canada and the United States. But less than Free Trade Agreement of 1988.1 It was a year later, in December 1994, investors signed by Mexico, Canada, and the United sold their peso assets, the value of the Mex- States on December 17, 1992.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    1 Introduction Peter Hakim and Robert E. Litan When it came into force on January 1, 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) joined the eco- nomic futures of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Clearly both Canada and Mexico—given their geography and markets—had been integrating with the United States well before NAFTA took effect. Indeed, the United States and Canada had signed a bilateral free trade accord six years earlier. But, with NAFTA in place, the pace of inte- gration accelerated, and systematic rules governing trade and investment along with dispute resolution mechanisms were established, and the governments assumed an active role in guiding, promoting, and managing economic rela- tions among the three countries. Moreover, the three coun- tries are increasingly viewed as a single economic entity, one with a gross domestic product (GDP) of some $10 tril- 1 2 Introduction lion, or 15 percent larger than the fifteen-country European Union (EU). What then lies ahead for North America? As it stands, NAFTA takes a narrow view of integration, focusing almost exclusively on trade and investment matters, steering clear of any new institutional, social, or development arrange- ments. NAFTA barely addresses such vital issues as immi- gration policy and labor markets, the energy sector, envi- ronmental protection, and law enforcement. Moreover, despite their trilateral relationship, the three governments of North America largely conduct business within the frame- work of two bilateral relationships, that is, between Canada and the United States and between Mexico and the United States. The governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States now must confront the question of whether NAFTA is enough.
    [Show full text]
  • NAFTA and Mexico's Economic Performance
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Tornell, Aaron; Westermann, Frank; Martínez, Lorenza Working Paper NAFTA and Mexico's Economic Performance CESifo Working Paper, No. 1155 Provided in Cooperation with: Ifo Institute – Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich Suggested Citation: Tornell, Aaron; Westermann, Frank; Martínez, Lorenza (2004) : NAFTA and Mexico's Economic Performance, CESifo Working Paper, No. 1155, Center for Economic Studies and ifo Institute (CESifo), Munich This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/76631 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu NAFTA AND MEXICO’S ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE AARON TORNELL FRANK WESTERMANN LORENZA MARTÍNEZ CESIFO WORKING PAPER NO. 1155 CATEGORY 5: FISCAL POLICY, MACROECONOMICS AND GROWTH MARCH 2004 An electronic version of the paper may be downloaded • from the SSRN website: www.SSRN.com • from the CESifo website: www.CESifo.de CESifo Working Paper No.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Foreign Direct Investment in Mexico Since NAFTA
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive The Effects of Foreign Direct Investment in Mexico since NAFTA Waldkirch, Andreas Colby College 28 March 2008 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7975/ MPRA Paper No. 7975, posted 29 Mar 2008 06:58 UTC The Effects of Foreign Direct Investment in Mexico since NAFTA∗ Andreas Waldkirch† March 2008 Abstract Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) into Mexico has increased dramatically since the inception of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), raising questions about its effect on the Mexican economy. This paper studies the impact of FDI on industry productivity and wages over the first ten years of NAFTA, paying particular attention to the source country and destination industry of investments. It also offers a detailed description of the evolution of FDI, its components, sectoral composition, and sources from 1994-2005. There is evidence of a positive effect of FDI on productivity, particularly total factor productivity (TFP). The effect on wages is negative or zero at best, suggesting a divergence from productivity over this time period. The positive productivity effect stems largely from U.S. FDI into non-maquiladora industries, which receive over two thirds of manufacturing FDI. There is no evidence that more distant source countries have a differential effect. Consistent with theoretical expectations, FDI into maquiladoras benefits unskilled workers at the expense of skilled workers. This effect may be strong enough to dampen income inequality. Keywords: Foreign Direct Investment, Mexico, NAFTA, Productivity, Wages, Income Inequality. JEL Classification: F15, F21, F23, O15. ∗I thank seminar participants at the 4th Minnesota International Economic Development Conference, the Western Economic Association Conference in Seattle, the European Trade Study Group Conference in Athens/Greece and the North American Economics and Finance Association Winter Meetings in New Orleans and especially Sven Arndt and Galina Hale for useful comments on an earlier version of the paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Mexico-U.S-Canada Relations in the New World Order
    UCLA Chicana/o Latina/o Law Review Title Mexico-U.S-Canada Relations in the New World Order Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/28q7861b Journal Chicana/o Latina/o Law Review, 12(1) ISSN 1061-8899 Author Brooks, David Publication Date 1992 DOI 10.5070/C7121021003 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California MEXICO-U.S.-CANADA RELATIONS IN THE NEW WORLD ORDER DAVID BROOKS t We are faced today with the most pivotal moment in this coun- try's relations with Mexico and Canada. Over the last year, we have witnessed the ongoing dialogue intended to forge a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). This free-trade agree- ment would be the largest and wealthiest in the world. The United States would be entering into a free trade agreement with its first and third largest trading partners, Canada and Mexico, respec- tively. This, prospectively, could have a direct impact on 350 mil- lion people in these three countries. We have heard a lot of reports on the benefits of such an arrangement from the three governments involved as well as from others who support the negotiations. We also know, despite repeated assertions by the administrations, that this deal is not only about trade, but also about lowering tariffs and other barriers. NAFTA involves something far more extensive than simply a commercial agreement. It will have a powerful impact on how the three nations of the North American continent will relate to one another, and to the world beyond, outside of the pure eco- nomic context.
    [Show full text]
  • "Mexican Meltdown: States, Markets, and Post-NAFTA Financial Turmoil" (With Maxwell Cameron)
    A revised version appears as: "Mexican Meltdown: States, Markets, and post-NAFTA Financial Turmoil" (with Maxwell Cameron). Third World Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 5, 1996 MEXICAN MELTDOWN: STATES, MARKETS AND POST-NAFTA FINANCIAL TURMOIL Maxwell A. Cameron Associate Professor Norman Paterson School of International Affairs Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6 CANADA Tel: (613) 520-6655 Fax: (613) 520-2889 and Visiting Fellow Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies 216 Hesburgh Center University of Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 USA Tel: (219) 631-6982 Fax: (219) 631-6717 E-Mail: [email protected] Vinod K. Aggarwal Professor University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720 USA Tel: (510) 642-2817 Fax: (510) 642-9515 E-Mail: [email protected] September 1996 ABSTRACT The devaluation of the Mexican peso in December 1994 triggered a financial panic that required massive intervention by the United States government and the International Monetary Fund in an effort to prevent a full-scale financial collapse. This article examines the impact, causes, and policy implications of the peso crisis, as well as the reasons for the U.S.-led bailout package. It then considers the crisis in the light of three classical schools of international political economy: liberalism, mercantilism, and structuralism. The conclusions call attention to the potentially destabilising effects of deregulated financial markets, especially for countries that are heavily reliant on foreign savings, and suggests that existing institutions at the international level are inadequate for managing the problem. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Maxwell A. Cameron is Associate Professor at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University and a Visiting Fellow at the Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame.
    [Show full text]
  • Poverty and Inequality in Mexico
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Research Papers in Economics Serie documentos de trabajo THE DYNAMICS OF INCOME INEQUALITY IN MEXICO SINCE NAFTA Gerardo Esquivel El Colegio de México DOCUMENTO DE TRABAJO Núm. IX - 2010 . The Dynamics of Income Inequality in Mexico since NAFTA Gerardo Esquivel 1 El Colegio de México This version: November 2010 Abstract: This paper reviews the pattern of income inequality in Mexico since 1994. It shows that in the past few years there has been an important reduction of income inequality in Mexico, which has almost reverted the sharp increase in inequality observed between 1984 and 1994. Using a Gini decomposition exercise we conclude that labor income, transfers and remittances have all played an important role in this process. We also argue that the equalizing effect of labor income and the reduction of wage inequality in Mexico can be explained by a structural change in Mexico‟s workforce composition in terms of education and experience. In general, we conclude that the recent reduction of inequality in Mexico is due to the interaction of both, the market and the State. 1 This paper was originally written as part of the UNDP project “Markets, the State and the Dynamics of Inequality,” coordinated by Nora Lustig and Luis Felipe López Calva. I thank participants in previous seminars at United Nations offices in New York and Mexico City, as well as participants at the Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association (LACEA) Congresses in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and Buenos Aires, Argentina for their useful comments and suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Foods and New Consumers in Mexico Under Economic Reforms
    African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics Volume 9 Number 1 pages 33-53 Old foods and new consumers in Mexico under economic reforms Antonio Yúnez-Naude PRECESAM, El Colegio du Mexico. E-mail: [email protected] Paper prepared for the Plenary Session: “The changing agrarian structure in Africa: lessons from South America” at the 4th International Conference of the African Association of Agricultural Economists, Hammamet, Tunisia. 1. Introduction In the 1980s, the Mexican government instituted wide-ranging market-oriented policies. With respect to the food, agriculture and rural sectors, the reforms ranged from constitutional changes to enhance private property rights in rural “communal” lands, to the elimination of price supports granted to farmers producing staple crops. Policy changes included agricultural trade liberalisation: in 1985, Mexico joined the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT), and January 1994 saw the start of the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). At the same time, transitional agricultural policies were being implemented and a comprehensive social programme was initiated to alleviate rural poverty. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the performance of agricultural and food production in Mexico during the reforms and NAFTA, as well as the consequences of this performance and of food trade liberalisation on food security, consumption patterns and food poverty. The paper is divided into six parts. Part 2 assesses major agricultural reforms and trade liberalisation under NAFTA, and their expected impacts, as well as new policies that accompanied the reforms. In Part 3, major trends in agricultural production and trade, farm size and yields during the last decades are discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • Mexican Manufacturing and Its Integration Into Global Value Chains
    Inclusive and Sustainable Industrial Development Working Paper Series WP 3 | 2016 MEXICAN MANUFACTURING AND ITS INTEGRATION INTO GLOBAL VALUE CHAINS DEPARTMENT OF POLICY RESEARCH AND STATISTICS WORKING PAPER 03/2016 Mexican manufacturing and its integration into global value chains Juan Carlos Castillo UNU-MERIT Adam Szirmai UNU-MERIT UNITED NATIONS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION Vienna, 2016 Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge financial support from UNIDO for the PhD project of the first author (UNIDO Specialization on Structural Change and Industrialization). We thank Bart Verspagen for advice, comments and criticisms. The designations employed, descriptions and classifications of countries, and the presentation of the material in this report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or its economic system or degree of development. The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Secretariat of the UNIDO. The responsibility for opinions expressed rests solely with the authors, and publication does not constitute an endorsement by UNIDO. Although great care has been taken to maintain the accuracy of information herein, neither UNIDO nor its member States assume any responsibility for consequences which may arise from the use of the material. Terms such as “developed”, “industrialized” and “developing” are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgment. Any indication of, or reference to, a country, institution or other legal entity does not constitute an endorsement.
    [Show full text]
  • Primax International Journal of Commerce and Management Research (PIJCMR)
    Primax International Journal of Commerce And Management Research (PIJCMR) Your GATEWAY to World class Research • Research Papers • Articles • Case studies Primax International Journal of Commerce and Management Research No.25/A, Nagadevanahalli, Boothappa Temple Road, 80 Feet Ring Road, Jnanabharathi Post, Bangalore -56, Karnataka, India. Ph: 08971725451 Email: [email protected], [email protected] www.primaxijcmr.com Primax International Journal of Commerce and Management Research Online ISSN: 2321-3612 Managing Editor: Prof. T. Rajeswari., M.Sc.,M.A(Eng).,M.B.A.,M.A.(Soc)., Chief Editor: Dr.K.V. Ramanathan., M.Com.,M.Phil.,M.B.A.,P.D.B.S.,Ph.D., Professor- Primax Research Center Bangalore. Coordinator: Dr. V. Selvaraj Former, Head & Associate Professor, Nehru Memorial College (Autonomous),Tiruchirappalli Dr. M. Muthu Gopalakrishnan Associate Professor, Acharya Bangalore B School, Bangalore. Dr. N. Giri Babu, Associate Professor, Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering & Technology, Chittoor. Publisher: Primax Commerce and Management Research Academy, Bangalore-56 (Karnataka Reg.: 48/159/CE/0103/2013) Issue: Special Issue, November 2015 COPYRIGHT: 1. All rights reserved. And Copyright © 2013, Primax Commerce and Management Research Academy. 2. Reproduction of any part of this Journal in the whole or in part without written permission from the publisher is prohibited . 3. All rights reserved ISSN: 2321-3604 Contact: Prof. T. Rajeswari., M.Sc.,M.A(Eng.).,M.B.A.,M.A(Soc) Founder and Managing Editor, Primax Commerce and Management Research
    [Show full text]
  • English Industrialists Supported Universal Education at the End of the 19Th Century As a Way to Increase Their Ability to Compete with French and German Companies
    NO GROWTH WITHOUT EQUITY? Inequality, Interests, and Competition in Mexico Santiago Levy and Michael Walton Editors NO GROWTH WITHOUT EQUITY? INEQUALITY, INTERESTS, AND COMPETITION IN MEXICO NO GROWTH WITHOUT EQUITY? INEQUALITY, INTERESTS, AND COMPETITION IN MEXICO Santiago Levy and Michael Walton Editors A copublication of Palgrave Macmillan and the World Bank ©2009 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org E-mail: [email protected] All rights reserved 01 02 03 04 12 11 10 09 A copublication of The World Bank and Palgrave Macmillan. Palgrave Macmillan Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS and 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. 10010 Companies and representatives throughout the world Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the Palgrave Macmillan division of St. Martin’s Press, LLC and of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. Macmillan® is a registered trademark in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries. Palgrave® is a registered trademark in the European Union and other countries. This volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. The fi ndings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this volume do not necessarily refl ect the views of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgement on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.
    [Show full text]