 So now we have time for questions. Okay, let's start here. Thanks. It's a question for Vito. So I was a little confused about two possible ways of looking at migration of individual A from origin to destination, which is it can be with the same income. You can carry your income with you or you can change your income, right? You go to this other place and your income changes. Now from some of your theoretical description, it sounded like you were head in your mind this person with the same income. With his own income. Now in my mind there couldn't be any changing global inequality if that happens, right? Because a global inequality you there's anonymity so you're here now you're there but you're the same observation in the vector. So there could be changes in within country of course but not in global inequality. So when you have changes in global inequality presumably that is because say in your empirical exercise you're observing the migrant with a different income. Now the same person has moved but the income has also changed. So in some sense there are two factors at least on within country inequality. There is a factor of location so it could be rich in Syria but poor in Italy or something like that but there's also the change in income effect. I don't know if you did separate those and in my mind for the global inequality I mean empirically there'll be issues around PPPs and all kinds of things messing up but conceptually if you observed everybody its incomes in dollars just moving a person from one place to the other should have no effect so all of the effect on global inequality should come from changes in incomes of the migrants. Right. Thank you. Thank you Chico. So the paper doesn't have a theoretical model there so we do this empirical analysis and that's the result. Then I was thinking what's the theory from the point of view of inequality measurement. So my point was that when you move an individual from one country to another country you're moving a mass. So apart from the movement of the income so the effect of income you're moving a person so the population size is changing and that is an effect on inequality at least on the between countries inequality and then there is an effect on the within country inequality. It is not clear to me what is the sign of these two effect. Of course on the world inequality in time there is an inequality in the population of the world where there is no attach to each of us what is nationality nothing changed. Of course unless we assume that the income can change but in the between groups those are groups okay in the between groups and within groups the fact that the size of the groups is changing is something that affects inequality. That is why I was puzzled puzzled and I don't have an answer so that that's and then there is a problem of course what is the income that the individual expects to have when he moves from one country to another country and that is an empirical of course an empirical issue. Just a quick follow-up I mean just again so suppose we are in a world where you what you were thinking of which is you take your income with you so there's no change in income individual eye has the same income at origin and destination then we know that that global inequality does not change and therefore the effect in between group and within group will have to add up to zero which is what you find. Not exactly but that's probably because you are observing them with other incomes you're observing the empirical result I'm just saying you see what I'm saying my question is to the natural disasters yes because we are having like a similar paper tomorrow in the climate session but we are having all the disasters in the in the paper we are having like a kind of integration between the climate and disasters and the inequality and the growth it's integrated modern so we are we are having like the number of people affected by the disaster is one of the important variables that we take into consideration while we're doing this so it's not just the number of the events the frequency but also the intensity of this event so that's my suggestion okay thank you. If someone was raising the hand before okay okay thank you so two comments one for Vito is if you have like an issue of causality from inequality to migration and the other way around yes it's at least one let's say in the theoretical part if if if you can let's say if you have only one causality then you don't have an issue with with causality in your regression but the first question is can you can you control let's say can you deal with that issue of causality the second is different people may have different incentives for for migrating so you may want to check for for heterogeneous effects like I know different coefficients for different levels of income I don't know and one for for Flaviana I think maybe more than than inequality itself there is an issue of polarization income polarization if you have clear defined groups then you have trust issues so so maybe and and what you found regarding between inequality maybe suggesting that so so you may want to to check if if you can use a measure of polarization and then the other issues people let's say trust may be related to what the government is doing for income distribution so you may want to to use the difference between pre taxes inequality and after taxes inequality thank you so we take a few questions and then all the answers because there are many people yeah this is in line with the suggestion about polarization I think it's a very good suggestion I was wondering a bit about whether the underlying theory so you said you didn't just want to use the aggregate genie you wanted to break it up into like percentile bands or something and then you were using the genie within the band but I think that some of the theory around the around trust is is you almost need like what what's the reference group for each person along the percentile I'm wondering you know like could you you could think that and I don't know what what the how you define a reference group like that but say it was like a 10% either way of any anybody at a certain percentile you could define the genie coefficient per percentile in that way if that's the if that's the theory because if you just cut it up into percentile groups then there's a problem at the boundary you know how do you think about the people at the boundary you know the people just below are in a group and the people just above are in a group but I think the theory of the trust that you're trying to get to something like a relative you know relative to a group around around you or something like that so maybe that's that's something you could do there's some issues on the boundaries of course when you get right down at the bottom but if you're the poorest you're the poorest that's what it is yeah thanks thank you go to the other side that hi thanks a really interesting set of papers I don't want to pile on but I also had a question for Flaviana so I'm wondering about the role of institutional quality I mean if you're in a country where you don't where the institutions don't work well you probably shouldn't trust government so I wonder if you how do you take that into account in looking at this relationship thanks for a very interesting set of papers I have a question for Flaviana and one for Vito for Flaviana I was wondering if so you show that interpersonal trust and trust in institutions are two different phenomena and I was wondering if you can dig in more into interpersonal trust because I wonder if there are different phenomena within that and I don't know if the whole value of service allows you to do it but I wonder if trust in persons of your own group whatever the group is and trusting persons from outside your group are different and actually opposite phenomena where trust in institution declines trusting people from other groups declines as well and therefore trusting people of your group increases relatively you see so and increasing trust in people of your own group is not necessarily a positive phenomenon I don't know while trusting people from other groups may be a positive phenomenon for social cohesion I don't know if you are able to look into that or not and and then for Vito you get a very strong effect of migration on within country inequality and I was wondering how you got to that because the literature the empirical literature I know on this is not so conclusive it's because low income workers and migrant workers that are low income are are not necessary competing with each other more complimentary and so I don't know I've seen a more nuanced literature on this topic and I'm wondering how you get your result I think that's more a philosophical okay maybe I should stop yes I had a question for Vito Peragini as well one could speculate that for the migrants what is maybe more relevant than the overall distribution of the destination country is the distribution of the incomes of migrants of the same country or region in that destination country and I had the sense that in the second part of your paper you have a way to recover those distributions at least at a regional level knowing in its destination country so I was wondering if you could like take those that data to the first part and check whether if it matters for migration decisions how much it matters and how much then they aggregate distributional characteristics of the destination country matter once including information on the particular in form distribution for the migrants which is probably what they where they can more realistically expect not to end there was any other question here no I have a one question for fellow Viana yes very interesting paper so I guess there may be public some different between short-term inequality and long-term inequality right say for example long-term inequality if you look at inequality every over the past 10 years or even 15 years so right then so I just wonder you know if there any different you know in the impact of short-term inequality and long-term inequality on your reasons and also for longer term inequality I guess you may also and you have to worry less about you know end of the 80s right because and this is not given and and for the whole value survey it's like a the value right now so so in a way you know it can help a bit with your problem yeah thank you thank you very much a lot of questions I have a question for yeah when in the first part in the first part of the results when you don't have a control I think for the net of migrants in the destination country the people but if that is a big phenomena that may be affected the inequality in the in the destination country and I'm not it maybe like it may be interacting with your result but in nothing contradictory ways but yeah the net because they may be increasing the genie in the in the destination country even even without you find your results but I was wondering how that may be interacting okay a few minutes for you to reply let's start with Vito okay so let me start with them the easy ones which are so a one question was it would be interesting to see to into I mean to include in the first part of the paper when we study how inequality affect the migrations okay to include some information on the path of the distribution where migrants are expected to land after the moment and this is part this is in the in the models we I didn't discuss them but are there also there you know the last columns of the table we have the average income of the 40% the average income so yeah that's something we do and in fact is in the right direction we say so the results are consistent and we don't have I mean there are many things for which we do not control this is a very parsimonious model if you want but I agree that that is very important so there are different mechanisms that we can be behind you know and yeah so now on the reverse causality you know I'd like to say that the second part of our paper is an answer to the problem of reverse causality in the first part but in fact it is not the right answer because in the last part of the paper what we have is that the global inequality doesn't change but there is a positive effect of migration on inequality within countries and that is exactly the kind of inequality for which we test in the first part so yeah I'm afraid to say that I mean you know that model which is a panel fixed effect model maybe maybe maybe you know in a sense I mean it's sensible to this criticism and and the second part if I understand well in which we show that in fact that my migration increases the inequality within countries you know in a sense gives significant to this to this problem and we don't have the composition of skills if that was the question of skills and heterogeneity although that has been very discussed very much discussed in the literature we if they don't know if that was the question taking into account the heterogeneity of the migrants to see so not not only the income so the position income distribution but also some other characteristics that we don't do that I mean that is very well discussed in the literature so we just focus on you know on the income of the of the of the origin and we you know we obtain it in the second part of the country we don't control for that and there is another question the effect of migration on inequality we do know how how is it that we have this a strong effect I don't know I mean we should discuss in detail what the way we we construct what was your question the way we constructed it counterfactual distribution because the you know that result comes from comparing the actual distribution with the distribution without migration it might be you know that the way in which this contract is usually constructed and we can discuss later because you know may bring those strong results it may be possible but that is the basically the driver of that way that strong result yes I'll stop you okay so thank you for all this question and suggestion I start with the polarization issue yes we will check and add some polarization measure in fact the results about the between inequality component is maybe suggesting that there is an issue of polarization but still I just want to underline that the final result of the impact of aggregating equity on institutional trust is driven actually by the within inequality component so still the profile of inequality matters is just not only polarization but for sure we will add a section by considering polarization difference between pre-tax and post-tax yes Carlos I don't remember if the database has also information on pre-tax is only post-tax so maybe we have we will explore other database that provide pre-tax distribution institution are quite a yes at a certain time I remember that we are the control and then we decided to leave it out because I think we were losing too many information but I will check it again interpersonal trust no we didn't go into detail of because our focus was institutional trust but for sure there is something to to to look and to to to be said about this about the trend of both internet interpersonal trust and similar story for short-term and long-term inequality we didn't check the difference between the two so we just we are just considering unitemperate inequality and just so it's short-term inequality and we will we will also consider consider adding and looking at what happened when we also had a long term inequality then there was a question about the boundary I'm not sure I understood when what you were referring to but the way in which we are computing this profile is we are dividing distribution into three parts so we compute this within inequality in the bottom 40 percent then between the 41 and the 80 percent and then eighty hundred percent and we take then the between between between equities within this group so I'm not sure I got your question about boundary but maybe we can discuss yeah after so I think that's it okay so the comment on number of people affected by the natural disaster I think that's a really good comment I do not have data on that but I think indirectly I'm able to look into that by constructing percentiles of fiery to do power show to the extent that higher percentiles reflect higher intensity of the disaster right so that might be one way to indirectly you tease out the channel that you're talking about but that's really good so this and I'll certainly look into that thank you okay any last very last question or comment or reaction I think that on it because I think too easy so I have a question for Veronica this economic complexity thing I don't know maybe I missed it did you have a theory or a hypothesis for mechanisms for example I was thinking that suppose you think of increasing economic complexity in a cosmopolitan way you know there's more activities maybe higher income in some of them maybe you'd expect the market side of things to make inequality greater I could think of counter arguments as well but let's say but then but then you know there's demand for public insurance and countries develop welfare states and as they are more economically complex actually perhaps the market income wouldn't change very much but they have developed these mechanisms and is that something that that was in your model at all or in your empirics at all no the basic idea for the complexity index the idea for the complexity index is like we can think of like a proxy of technology incorporation because basically the Asian countries are the ones that move forward so what we have the question about the development of the welfare state and how that may be related I mean I have not control for that and I am just now thinking that we have as I said after taxes genie so maybe there is some story like some more complex story in the in the argumentation but the main message that we have up to now is that this basic idea that that making economies more complex through the incorporation of technology may lead to lower inequality yes but not for poor countries up to a certain stage up to do reach there so that's like the basic the basic intuition behind the model so what what may be happening then it's like more complex I'm not sure but we what we are trying to to understand is that this virtue cycle technology inequality technology or complexity in in the type of production that we are doing also we have some limitations because this economic complexity index is based on x in on on exports basically so it's if it depends also on the time of x for not necessarily your your production your domestic production is reflected there in another way but it's the only kind of measure that you may have that synthesizes the concept because that's that's the main idea so okay so thank you very much all the presenters