在本研究中，我們利用各種統(tǒng)計(jì)工具對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行分析，以了解國(guó)際貿(mào)易對(duì)金磚國(guó)家收入不平等的影響。據(jù)觀察，25年來(lái)，收入不平等現(xiàn)象一直很嚴(yán)重。為了進(jìn)一步檢驗(yàn)國(guó)際貿(mào)易對(duì)這一現(xiàn)象的影響，用PMG估計(jì)模型中的貿(mào)易與GDP比率來(lái)衡量貿(mào)易開(kāi)放度，結(jié)果表明，貿(mào)易開(kāi)放度的提高確實(shí)導(dǎo)致了收入不平等的加劇。此外，進(jìn)出口等國(guó)際貿(mào)易指標(biāo)對(duì)提高收入質(zhì)量也具有重要意義，而且不僅是整體貿(mào)易。

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Background of the Topic
Data from the World Income Inequality database has revealed the presence of within-countryinequality in the past decades, with the rise in globalization. This within-country inequality hasbeen observed in developing as well as developed nations. According to international trade theory,while the Heckscher Ohlin model serves as a yardstick offering an explanation for rising incomeinequality owing to trade, data and results have been inconsistent in providing an empiricalexplanation for the same. Within the Heckscher-Ohlin model framework, the Stolper-Samuelsontheorem further states that the increase in trade increases the real return to factor relativelyabundant in a country, lowering the real return to the lesser abundant factor. In view of this, forthe BRICS engaging in international trade, the abundance of unskilled labour would lead to anincrease in real returns to labour wages, decreasing income inequality. Contrary to the HeckscherOhlin model and the Stolper- Samuelson theorem, this is not the case.
With liberalization in these countries, technology became a major player in determining trade.Therefore technological changes led to an increase in the demand for skilled workers, withunskilled labour having to adapt to the changing trends or be left out from the workforce. Othercommon factors such as limited access to education, a decrease in the real value of minimumwages and weakening of unions due to political or market forces led to the noticeable increase inincome inequality. (Harrison, et al., 2011)
.......................

1.2 Motivation for the Research
Studies have shown that countries with higher trade openness tend to have higher living standardsand lower income inequality. For developing economies such as the BRICS, increase exports andland foreign direct investment to lift the vast population to improved levels of income has beenthe narrative for far too long. The gap between GDP per capita and income inequality haspersistently widened in the last two decades in spite of having phenomenal growth rates anddevelopment with participation in international trade.
For countries that adopt open trade policies may also pursue other market-friendly domesticpolicies and conduct stable fiscal and monetary policies. Workers in industries that are confrontedby competition from imported products may find that demand for their labor decreases and shiftsback to the left, so that their wages decline with a rise in international trade. Conversely, workersin industries that benefit from selling in global markets may find that demand for their labor shiftsout to the right, so that trade raises their wages. As international trade increases, it contributes toa shift in jobs away from industries where that economy does not have a comparative advantageand toward industries where it does have a comparative advantage. The degree to which tradeaffects labor markets has much to do with the structure of the labor market in that country and theadjustment process in other industries. Global trade should raise the average level of wages byincreasing productivity
......................

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 International Trade Theory
The traditional trade theory of the Heckscher-Ohlin model, predicts that trade integration shouldgenerate wage differences across industries. It says countries export those factors in bundled goodsin which they are relatively wee-endowed. This leads to an increase in the demand for theirabundant factors thereby benefitting developing countries that have unskilled labour anddeveloped countries having capital. Building on the Heckscher-Ohlin model, Bourguignon, andMorrision (1990) illustrated that since less developed countries are labour abundant, the trade willincrease exports of labor-intensive products. This would increase the real wages which will reduceincome inequality.
Ricardian trade theory suggests that along with comparative advantage, the relative difference intechnology leads to trade, and countries will gain from trade as long as this relative difference intechnological requirements exists (Ricardo, 1821).
Another important contribution was made by Simon Kuznets (1955) who hypothesized that withan increase in incomes, inequality would first rise and then decline as a country developed whichwas known as the Kuznets inverted-U curve hypothesis. In Kuznets’ original exposition, theeconomic shift from agriculture to industry drove such an increase in inequality. He proposes anon-linear relationship between trade liberalization and income inequality. However recent studiesby Anderson and Nielsen (2002) have come up with results contrary to it with inequality decliningfor a while but rising again. Kuznets’ study mainly focused on how income inequality changes as the country develops using time series data from developed countries such as Germany, the UK,and the US. Further research by Montek S. Ahluwalia (1976), Anand and Kanbur (1993), Jha(1996), and Barro (2000) have also confirmed this hypothesis. However, the panel data on incomeinequality such as the Deininger-Square (1996) on which certain studies are based, do not find anysignificant relationship between income inequality and level of development.
..........................

2.2 Trade Liberalization and Income Inequality
The above-consolidated literature discusses the traditional, neoclassical, and modern trade theoriesand the discussion of income inequality. We now look at some recent works that have emphasizedtrade liberalization, globalization, and trade openness to study its impact on income inequality ineconomies.
Contrary to this, Spilimbergo et al (1999) suggested that countries that engaged in free trade, i.e.that have laissez-faire systems do not engage in the redistribution of income and benefits of tradeevenly hence the income inequality in these countries rises. Nissanke and Thorbecke (2006) in their research noted that trade liberalization associates with a greater economic sock and volatilemarket that impacts the poor households the hardest, by giving an example of the Asian FinancialCrisis.
Mixed results in the empirical results have shown that in some cases trade liberalization decreasesincome inequality such in the works of Reuveny and Li (2003), Dollar and Kray (2004), whileothers have shown it increases income inequality such as Easterly (2005), Milanovic and Squire(2005, Bensidoun et al (2011). A 2007 Asian Development Bank report showed that in Asiancountries such as India and China, trade has led to benefits to the economy but income inequalityhas also risen.

Table 3.1: Data Description and Sources

..............................

Chapter 3: Research Methodology ...................................17
3.1 Data Sources and Collection .................................17
3.2 Justification of Variables...................................18
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion.............................24
4.1 Descriptive Analysis .........................24
4.2 Unit Root test results: Im-Pesaran-Shin unit root test ...................26
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations ...................33
5.1 Conclusion .............................33
5.2 Recommendations.........................35

Chapter 4: Results and Discussion

4.1 Descriptive Analysis
In this section, we will look at the results of the various tests and calculations carried out for themodel estimation. Further, we will discuss the results and draw inferences from the data to justifyour objectives of the study. The following table indicates the descriptive statistics of the panel datathat gives us a general idea of the variables across the time period.

Table 4.1: Descriptive Statistics

The Gini coefficient is observed to have a mean of 46.85%. That implies, over the period of 25years, BRICS countries have had an average Gini coefficient of 0.4685 on an average. Themaximum observed is 0.7325 and the minimum is 0.2866 indicating the wide range of incomedistribution across the countries.
......................
 

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1 Conclusion
In this study, we have made use of various statistical tools to analyze our data in order tounderstand the impact that international trade has on income inequality in the BRICS countries. Ithas been observed that for a period of 25 years, income inequality has been high. In order to furtherexamine the effect that international trade then has on this phenomenon, trade openness that hasbeen measured using the trade to GDP ratio in the PMG estimation model indicates that indeed,an increase in trade openness has led to an increase in the income inequality. Moreover, indicatorsof international trade such as imports and exports are also significant in increasing incomeinequality, and it is not just traded overall.
This is contrary to the literature that tells us that exports help to decrease income inequality as thebenefits are shared. The long-run effects of international trade are more significant than short-runeffects for the BRICS countries. International trade and inequality have for long been an issue thatscholars and policymakers have had to deal with. Events such as trade disputes, technology trade,and protectionism measures have dictated the world economy in the past few years and slowlyinternational trade has become a way to establish powers or challenge hegemony in the globalmarkets. if the inequality problem in the countries is not addressed, the economy will not be ableto reap profits gained through international trade for the welfare of its people and they will certainlynot trickle down.
reference(omitted)