2025/03/18 by Robert Manduca · 2 voices · 1 citation
Business, Management and Accounting · Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Health Professions · #Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis #Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism #Global Health Care Issues
paper · doi:10.1093/ser/mwaf020
Abstract Research on wealth and wealth inequality is hindered by lack of consensus on a fundamental question: what counts as wealth? Scholars disagree on whether net worth should encompass only marketable assets or also include non-marketable “augmented wealth,” such as pensions and social insurance programs. Because augmented wealth often exceeds marketable wealth in total value and is much more equitably distributed, definitional choices shape even the most basic conclusions of empirical wealth research. This article advocates for use-specific wealth definitions, recommending that researchers first identify the use(s) for wealth of interest in a given study, then include all assets available for those uses, whether marketable or not. Case studies of Norway and the United States demonstrate the importance of augmented wealth—beyond pensions alone—across the wealth distribution, while a cross national analysis shows that differences in augmented wealth can help resolve the puzzling lack of correlation between income and (marketable) wealth inequality across countries.