placestats

Equality score vs. Redistribution

Holds up after adjusting for income

Across 44 countries, Equality score and Redistribution rise and fall together at r = +0.67 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to +0.52 (q = 0.040, allowing for the many pairs tested). Much of the first figure is that both measures rise with national income, but a moderate positive link remains. Caution: leave-one-out range spans 0.16 in r.

Comparing countries across the middle half of redistribution, 22.9% to 38.2% reduction in the Gini, equality score is better by 0.366 typical gaps at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 0.321 typical gaps.

Link before adjusting (r)+0.675p = 5.0e-7 · 44 countries
After adjusting for national income+0.525p = 0.000 · likely range [+0.27, +0.71]
p, allowing for regions0.106standard error 0.277 · 7 regions
Check for luck (q)0.040across 12,497 pairs

How to read these.r runs from −1 (one goes up as the other goes down) to +1 (they rise together), and 0 means no link. Adjusting for national income means comparing countries with the same GDP per person, so differences in wealth can’t explain the link. Income is used in percentage terms, since an extra $1,000 means more to a poor country than to a rich one. p is how likely a link this strong would be if there were really none. Below 0.05 means it is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 1.1e-32 means a decimal point followed by 31 zeros and then 11, so very close to zero. The likely range is where the true figure probably lies, and a range that crosses zero means the link could easily be chance. Countries in the same region tend to resemble each other, so the third figure allows for that, which gives a fairer p. The standard error is the typical size of the error in r. Finally, testing this many pairs means some will look strong by luck alone. A q below 0.05 means this link is unlikely to be one of those.

Equality score · typical gaps (standard deviations)link with income +0.64 · high
Redistribution · % reduction in the Ginilink with income +0.50 · moderate

“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.

Every country as a dot

Equality score · typical gaps (standard deviations) →Redistribution · % reduction in the Gini →-1.121.062.67%48.3%Australia: 0.473 typical gaps (standard deviations), 27.7% reduction in the GiniAustria: 0.632 typical gaps (standard deviations), 41.4% reduction in the GiniBelgium: 0.895 typical gaps (standard deviations), 47.7% reduction in the GiniBulgaria: 0.143 typical gaps (standard deviations), 26% reduction in the GiniBrazil: -0.529 typical gaps (standard deviations), 13.8% reduction in the GiniCanada: 0.62 typical gaps (standard deviations), 29.3% reduction in the GiniSwitzerland: 0.491 typical gaps (standard deviations), 21.2% reduction in the GiniChile: -0.0426 typical gaps (standard deviations), 8.68% reduction in the GiniChina: 0.37 typical gaps (standard deviations), 6.22% reduction in the GiniCosta Rica: -0.196 typical gaps (standard deviations), 12.6% reduction in the GiniCzechia: 0.961 typical gaps (standard deviations), 43.5% reduction in the GiniGermany: 0.484 typical gaps (standard deviations), 38.7% reduction in the GiniDenmark: 0.709 typical gaps (standard deviations), 37.5% reduction in the GiniSpain: 0.498 typical gaps (standard deviations), 34.4% reduction in the GiniEstonia: 0.666 typical gaps (standard deviations), 33.5% reduction in the GiniFinland: 0.858 typical gaps (standard deviations), 47.2% reduction in the GiniFrance: 0.608 typical gaps (standard deviations), 42.2% reduction in the GiniUnited Kingdom: 0.566 typical gaps (standard deviations), 29.7% reduction in the GiniGreece: 0.503 typical gaps (standard deviations), 36.9% reduction in the GiniCroatia: 0.701 typical gaps (standard deviations), 33.1% reduction in the GiniHungary: 0.656 typical gaps (standard deviations), 29.4% reduction in the GiniIndia: 0.836 typical gaps (standard deviations), 2.67% reduction in the GiniIreland: 0.769 typical gaps (standard deviations), 41.2% reduction in the GiniIceland: 0.895 typical gaps (standard deviations), 35.7% reduction in the GiniIsrael: 0.227 typical gaps (standard deviations), 23.2% reduction in the GiniItaly: 0.444 typical gaps (standard deviations), 36.2% reduction in the GiniJapan: 0.551 typical gaps (standard deviations), 34.1% reduction in the GiniKorea, Rep.: 0.545 typical gaps (standard deviations), 18.2% reduction in the GiniLithuania: 0.341 typical gaps (standard deviations), 29.7% reduction in the GiniLuxembourg: 0.505 typical gaps (standard deviations), 35.7% reduction in the GiniLatvia: 0.474 typical gaps (standard deviations), 28.1% reduction in the GiniMexico: -0.0506 typical gaps (standard deviations), 3.77% reduction in the GiniNetherlands: 0.958 typical gaps (standard deviations), 34.2% reduction in the GiniNorway: 0.91 typical gaps (standard deviations), 39.5% reduction in the GiniPoland: 0.795 typical gaps (standard deviations), 41.9% reduction in the GiniPortugal: 0.48 typical gaps (standard deviations), 36.5% reduction in the GiniRomania: 0.708 typical gaps (standard deviations), 38.1% reduction in the GiniRussian Federation: 0.539 typical gaps (standard deviations), 27% reduction in the GiniSlovak Republic: 1.06 typical gaps (standard deviations), 48.3% reduction in the GiniSlovenia: 1.02 typical gaps (standard deviations), 42.4% reduction in the GiniSweden: 0.734 typical gaps (standard deviations), 33.1% reduction in the GiniTurkiye: -0.0777 typical gaps (standard deviations), 18.6% reduction in the GiniUnited States: 0.00824 typical gaps (standard deviations), 22.1% reduction in the GiniSouth Africa: -1.12 typical gaps (standard deviations), 12.8% reduction in the GiniBELBRACHNDEUFININDKORMEXSVKZAF

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

MethodrpCountries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted+0.6755.0e-744
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted+0.7068.6e-844
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income+0.5250.00044
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income+0.6286.6e-644

The rank version uses only each country’s place in line, from lowest to highest, so a few extreme countries count for less. The adjusted and unadjusted versions use the same 44 countries: those that report both measures and GDP per person. So the gap between them comes from the adjustment, not from a change in which countries are counted. Drop in the size of r after adjusting: +0.150 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from +0.478 (without SVK) to +0.638 (without IND). The bar above shows that range on a scale from −1 to +1, with the solid line at the full result. The single country that moves r most: IND (+0.113).

Fragile: this link may not hold up.
  • leave-one-out range spans 0.16 in r

Within each region

Countries are not separate, unrelated cases, and neighbors share a lot. A link that holds inside each region is far more believable than one that shows up only when comparing regions.

nr
Europe & Central Asia31+0.72

By income third

If the link shows up only in the richest third of countries, it is a feature of rich countries, not a general pattern.

nr
Poorest third15+0.37
Middle third14+0.66
Richest third15+0.67

By largest religious group

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
Christians36+0.71

Without outliers (countries far outside the middle half of countries on either measure, by more than one and a half times the width of that middle half): r = +0.618 after dropping 5 countries.

Two series, one country

Both measures over the years for one country you pick. The two charts are stacked so they share only the years along the bottom.

Loading…

Over time, within countries

Everything above compares countries with each other at one moment. This section compares each country only with itself over 0years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Not enough history inside each country to look at this over time. That needs countries measured for several years in a row, and at least one of these measures is measured too rarely.

The data


typical gaps (standard deviations)
% reduction in the Gini		Years
Slovak Republic SVK1.0648.3%2023
Slovenia SVN1.0242.4%2023
Czechia CZE0.96143.5%2023
Netherlands NLD0.95834.2%2021, 2023
Norway NOR0.9139.5%2023, 2022
Iceland ISL0.89535.7%2019
Belgium BEL0.89547.7%2023
Finland FIN0.85847.2%2023
India IND0.8362.67%2022, 2011
Poland POL0.79541.9%2023
Ireland IRL0.76941.2%2023
Sweden SWE0.73433.1%2023
Denmark DNK0.70937.5%2023, 2022
Romania ROU0.70838.1%2023
Croatia HRV0.70133.1%2023

wdi
OECD databases as named on each indicator: PISA, Social Expenditure Database (SOCX), Income Distribution Database, Development Assistance Committee statistics, Family Database, Government at a Glance, Corporate Tax Statistics, employment and environment statistics

Sources

Equality score

Equality score

PlaceStats · via PlaceStats · Derived work; each member keeps its own licence · updated recomputed with the panel

The average of 2 measures from 1 publisher. Each measure is first put on a common scale: 0 is the average country in an average year, and 1 is a typical gap between countries (a standard deviation). Each is turned so that higher is better. Measures are averaged within each publisher first, so a publisher with many measures does not count for more. Members: Extreme poverty rate, Gini index.

Redistribution

Reduction in the Gini coefficient from taxes and transfers

OECD · via Our World in Data · CC BY 4.0 (OECD terms and conditions) · updated annual, except the snapshots noted per indicator · comparable from 2011 only

The Gini before taxes and payments minus the Gini after them, as a share of the first. It shows how much of the inequality produced by the market the government removes. It is built from the before-tax Gini above, so their pair is built from the same numbers and flagged. No "better" direction is set: a country may redistribute little because its market incomes are already equal.

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2011–2025. To adjust for income, each measure is first predicted from GDP per person (in percentage terms, on a log scale) with a straight-line fit. Only what is left over is then compared. This is called a partial correlation. The line is drawn the standard way (ordinary least squares), which picks the line that comes closest to all the countries at once. The error margins allow for countries in the same region resembling each other, using 7 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 12,497 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Equality score and Redistribution

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Equality score changes Redistribution, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.

More links with Equality score or Redistribution