DEBREMARKOS UNIVERSITY

BURE CAMPUS DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

RESEARCH PROPOSAL ON; DETERMINANT OF INCOME INEQUALITY IN THE CASE
OF BURE TOWN

Prepared BY: ID NO
DERARTU ABREHAM……………………………………………. 140/12
MEBRAT ALEMAYEHU…………………………………………..216/12
WERKNEH DESALEGN………………………....……………..…249/12
ZELEKE DESALEGN………………………………………………266/12

ADVISOR; SILABAT ENYEW (MSc)

FEBRUARY, 2023
BURIE, ETHIOPIA

Table of contents
ACKNOWLEGMENT

ACRONYMS

ABSRTACT

CHAPTER ONE

5
1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................5
1.1. Background of the study...............................................................................................................5
 1.2. Statement of the problem..................................................................................................................6
1.4. Objective of the study.......................................................................................................................8
1 .4.1. General objective of the study...................................................................................................8
1. 4.2 Specific objective of the study...................................................................................................9
1.4. Significance of the study...................................................................................................................9
1.5 Scope of the study..............................................................................................................................9

CHAPTER TWO

10
2. LITERATURE REVIEW...................................................................................................................10
2.1. Theoretical literature review...........................................................................................................10
2.1.1. Definition of income and income inequality............................................................................10
2.1.2. Cause of income inequality......................................................................................................11
2.2 Measurement of income inequality..................................................................................................14
2.3. 2 Empirical literature review...........................................................................................................14
2.4. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK....................................................................................................15

CHAPTER THREE

16
3. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY................................................................................................16
3.1. Description of the study area.......................................................................................................16
3.2. Demographic characteristics...........................................................................................................16
3.3. Source of data and its collection method.........................................................................................16
3.4 Sampling techniques and sample sizes.............................................................................................16
3.5. Methods of data analysis.................................................................................................................18

CHAPTER FOUR

18
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION..................................................................................18
4.1. Size distribution of income.............................................................................................................18
4.1.1. Functional or factors share distribution of income...................................................................18
4.2 Source of income of the respondents...............................................................................................22
4.3.1 Lorenz curve and income inequality.........................................................................................23
4.3.2 The Kuznets ratio and income inequality..................................................................................24
 4.4. Income generating activity of the respondents................................................................................25
4.5. Measuring of income inequality......................................................................................................26
4.5.1. Income distribution pattern of respondents..............................................................................26
4.6. Cause of income inequality.............................................................................................................27
4.6.1. Cause of income inequality......................................................................................................27
4.6.2. The other cause of income inequality.......................................................................................29
4.6.3. Measuring of income inequality...............................................................................................29
CHAPTER FIVE...................................................................................................................................33
5. CONCLUTION AND RECOMANDATION.....................................................................................33
5.1. CONCLUTION.........................................................................................................................33
5.2 Recommendation.............................................................................................................................34
6.Time and budget plan..........................................................................................................................37
6.1 Budget Plan..................................................................................................................................37

REFERENCE

38

APPENDEX

39

ACKNOWLEGMENT
In our deepest and warmest thanks go to the almighty God and his mother Saint Marry, who help
in all aspect of life including the achievement of bachelor degree program. We would like to
express in our advisor Silabat (Msc) for his constrictive comment, value suggestion and good
guidance at every stage during the completion of this study. It was pleasant and inspiring
experience for to work his guidance. Lastly but not the last, our appreciation also goes all our
friends.
ACRONYMS
LDCs=Least Developed Countries

DCs=Developed Country

GDP=Gross Domestic Product

GNP=Gross National Product

MDGs=Millennium Development Goal

EEA=Ethiopian Economic Association

WWII=World War Second

 ABSRTACT
Income inequality is the unequal distribution of household or individual income across the
various participants in an economy. This accounts for the presence of high poverty especially for
those households who are in a lower income group

Income inequality undermines economic growth and development of the country. It is not only
the problem of developing country rather international problem which exist in every corner of
the world. Different factors are responsible for income inequality such as difference in education
level, gender discrimination,Unemployment, inheritance, difference in wealth accumulation and
others. The objective of study is to examine the effect of above factors on income inequality in
Burie town .To achieve this goal, we were used both primary and secondary data source.
Primary data was collected through distributing questionnaires and interview the respondents by
using random sampling techniques and the secondary was collected from reviewing available
literature,books,journals and documents,published and unpublished material. Finally, solutions
were forwarded to reducing the problem like expansion of additional opportunity on education,
through redistributing of income and giving awareness to the society toward creating full
employment, and initiate poor households to work hard and coordinate lower income peoples
toward work, were the solution to reducing the problem of income inequality in the town.
CHAPTER ONE
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the study
Income inequality is an extreme concentration of wealth or income in the hands of a small
percentage of a population. It has been described as the gap between the richest and the rest.
Income inequality is the major that we are facing today in both rich and poor countries. Poverty
and inequality are usually studied simultaneously. Indeed, the relative position of households and
individuals between themselves, in addition to their absolute position, is essential in the analysis
of the population welfare. It is well known that the measures of poverty focus on households or
individuals below the poverty line. But measures of inequality consider the whole of the
population.

Income inequality indicates that the difference in income between individuals, families or
between different groups, areas or countries. It is one of the major problems at global level.
Currently global income inequality is probably greater than it has over been human history .The
richest 25% of world population received 75% of the world income. And the remains 25% of the
world income shared by 75% the poorest world population lives in developing country
particularly rural area of Asian and Africa country (Milanovic, 2005)

The problem is much in Africa, because the continent has low rate of economic growth and
people receive just 1.5% of the world income (Todaro, 2010).

Income inequality globally divided into three nation’s; high, middle and low nations. In high
income nation 16% of the population receive 55% of world income; in low income nation 84%
of population receive 45%of world income (Norton, 2010).

Measures of poverty as well as inequality can be calculated from an indicator such as income or
expenditure, (Boccanfuso and Kabore 2003). That is the poverty measures depend on the average
level of income or consumption in a country, and the distribution of income or consumption.
Based on these two elements, poverty measures then focus on the situation of those individuals
or households at the bottom of the distribution. It focuses only on those whose standard of living
falls below an appropriate threshold level (such as a poverty line). This threshold may be set in
absolute terms (based on an externally determined norm, such as calorie requirements) or in
relative terms (for example a fraction of the overall average standard of living). By contrast
relative poverty is more closely related to inequality in that what it means to be poor reflects
prevailing living conditions in the whole population, (McKay 2016). Hence inequality is
different from poverty but related to it. Inequality concerns variations in living standards across a
whole population. Inequality is a broader concept than poverty in that it is defined over the entire
population, not only for the population below a certain poverty line. Most inequality measures do
not depend on the mean of the distribution, and this property of mean independence is considered
to be a desirable property of an inequality measure. Instead, inequality is concerned with the
distribution.

Income inequality is determinant of poverty that leads to economic inefficiency, because high
inequality in overall rate of saving in the economy tends to be lower, due to this poverty may
happen. There is poverty social instability and there is no unity of interest among the people with
in the country (Michael and Todaro 2009).

Ethiopia is one of the countries in sub-Sahara Africa where very low income and high inequality
experienced. The country suffered from tremendous social unrest, war and natural disasters over
the last decades. But, it was able to register impressive recovery and growth which raised hope
and expectation of better life in recent years. However, poverty, disease, and unequal distribution
of income undermine any progress that may have been in social, economic and political spheres.
Ensuring fair distribution of income will help in alleviating poverty and achieving other
economic goals (Befekadu and Berhanu, 2000).

Burie town is one party of Ethiopia which also faced this income inequality problem. In the
town, income inequality problem will be growing since long period of time (Burie wereda plan
commission office, 2023).

1.2. Statement of the problem

The problem of income inequality is commonly understood as a problem of personal income
distribution, (Yusiro, 2004]. There is also a growing of concern that income inequality (at least)
within and between countries has been increasing and why academic, public policy makers and
development agencies are highly concerned with inequality due to its effect on poverty,
undermine growth, increased crime and social unrest are critical in attainment of Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs)(Mckay 2002). There are many negative effects of income
inequality proposed by different authors. For example, Erik (2002) found empirical evidence of
a negative correlation of about 0.5-0.8 percentage points between long-term growth rates and
sustained economic inequality. A variety of explanations have been proposed to explain how
inequality can work to stifle growth. A high level of economic inequality means a higher level of
poverty. Poverty is associated with increased crime and poor public health, which places burdens
on the economy. In the face of increasing food prices and lower incomes, support for pro-growth
government policies declines. Wealthy citizens maintain disproportionate political power
compared to poorer citizens, which encourages the development of inefficient tax structures
skewed in favor of the wealthy. Unequal income distribution increases political instability, which
threatens property rights, increases the risk of state repudiated contracts, and discourages capital
accumulation. A widening rich-poor gap tends to increase the rate of rent-seeking and predatory
market behaviors that hinder economic growth. Studies established a positive relationship
between income inequality and crime. According to a survey of research conducted between
1968 and 2000, most researchers point to evidence economically unequal societies have higher
crime rates. That survey concludes that inequality is the single factor most closely and
consistently related to crime.

Income distribution is not fair in every nation of the world, but the unfairness or inequality of
distribution of income is different from one country to another country. Income inequality is the
consequence of poverty, under nutrition sheer waste of human life. There is income inequality
populist movement may arise that focus more on redistribution and less on growth leading to
higher tax and less investment.(Norton,2010)

Income inequality is not fair for every nation of the world. Which means the extent of inequality
is different from country to country. The income inequality of least developed countries (LDCs)
more is unequal than that of developed nation (DCs).In general personal income is distributed
less equally in the poor nation than the wealthier nation. That means income gap between the
people of rich nation is narrower than that of least developed countries (Todaro, 2003).

Ethiopia being one of the countries which suffer from income inequality problem is describes as
atypical case with very high income inequality. Even though income inequality reduction is one
of the core objectives of Ethiopian government, still the gap between rich and poor has tended to
mined [EEA, 2004]. In fact, aggregate growth is probably the factors affecting the individual
level of income. It also proved that better living standard of an individual or household differ
based on the income. This, in another way, paves the way for income inequality across
households. The income of the family is a matter of great importance not only the country as a
whole but also for the welfare and health of individuals, the family and the community.

As different scholars indicated this inequality of income put its effects not only on the economic
phenomena of the country but also on the social condition of the country in general and
individual in particular like most Ethiopia towns. Burie has also experienced wide gap income
inequality mean while the extent varies. Hence this study is highly emphasizing to the
determinant of income inequality in urban area of west Gojjam zone in general Burie town in
particular.

In the previous various studies were done by different researchers on cause of income
inequality . However there was no more studies on cause of income inequality of unemployment,
difference in education level and gender discrimination.Therefore, this study was focused to fill
this gap of the areas which was not studied more widely in previous and to assess the effect of
inheritance on income inequality.

1.3. Basic research questions

This research paper raises the following questions:

What is the effect of unemployment on income inequality?

What is the effect of gender discrimination on income inequality?

What is the effect of inheritance on income inequality?

What leads to education difference on income inequality?

1.4. Objective of the study

1 .4.1. General objective of the study
The general objective of this study is to access the determinant of income inequality.

1. 4.2 Specific objective of the study

The specific objectives of this study are:

• To examine the effect of unemployment on income inequality

• To determine effect of gender discrimination on income inequality

• The effect of inheritance on income inequality

• The effect of education level difference on income inequality

1.4. Significance of the study

The study is expected to gives essential solution for the problem raised due to income inequality
in Burie town. It shows the gap between the poor and the rich and to shows the direction of the
government. The study also emphasis on the socio economic problems (such as high level of
unemployment,poor health, inadequate national income growth and crime) which are obstacle for
the welfare of the society therefore it shows the gap to the society and it creates moral on the
side of the poor in order to narrow the gap. It helps the society to identify the determinant and
other indicators of income inequality and shows the direction to alleviate income inequality
problems.

1.5 Scope and of the study

The study would be carried out in west gojjam zone in burie wereda particularly in burie town,
which is located in north west oe Ethiopia. The study would be analysed the determinant of
income inequality and it in detail, tried to examine the effect of age, education level, gender
discrimination, difference in education and employment difference among household on income
distributio.

1.6 Limitation of the study

The study would face some constraints while conducting the research.

1.6. Organization of the study

This research is organized in to five chapters: the first chapter is introductory party, the second
chapter deals with related literature review that provides the empirical and conceptually frame
work of the topic under study, the third chapter is study description of the study area and
methodology of the study. The fourth chapter contains data analysis and interpretation and the
fifth chapter studies conclusion and recommendations of the study.

CHAPTER TWO
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Theoretical literature review
2.1.1. Definition of income and income inequality
A). Definition of income
Income is money received by individuals and firms in the form of wage, salaries, rent, interest,
profit, etc. in the microeconomics analysis the term income is used specifically refers to the flow
of returns over period of time from providing factors of productions (natural resource and
capital) in the form of rent, wage and interest respectively (Dictionary of economics, 2008).

Personal income is a concept that has to do with command over resources. Simon (1963) put this
in terms of possession and exercise of rights. It connotes, broadly, the exercise of control over
the use of society's scarce resources. So, in these terms, according to the definition given above,
the calculation of personal income implies the estimation of the value of rights which the person
might have exercised in consumption without altering the value of his/her store of rights.
Therefore, when the value of store of rights is unaltered, in a given period of time, the potential
command over resources equates the actual. In this case, income is a good proxy for living
standard.

Money income is usually less than cost of living. Cost of living practically never equates money
income. Many persons live beyond their money income. According to Fisher's definition, money
income can never be greater than cost of living. Thus, the money that the individual receives in a
certain period would be money income only in the case in which this individual spent all the
money received in that period without saving. If the individual saves part of the money received,
only that part devoted to spent will be his/her money income. In this case, the money received
will be greater than the cost of living. If the individual does not save but borrows, all the money
received will be money income and it will be less than the cost of living.

Income is money, material or service received or accrued during period of time usually resulting
from the use of capital, the rendering of personal service or both include are wage, salaries, rents,
dividends, royalties, interest, payment, profit, pensions and annuities. Excluded receipt are (other
than profit) resulting from the sell or exchange of property (encyclopedia of economics, 2006).

B). Definition of income inequality

Income inequality is defining as the existence of disproportionate distribution of total national

income among household were by the share going to the rich person in the country is the greater
than that going to poorer person (a situation common to most less developed countries). This is
largely due to the difference in amount of income derived from the ownership of properties and a
lesser extent the result of difference in earn income(Todaro, 2003).

Economist usually like, to distinguish between two principal measures of size or personal
distribution of income and the functional or factors of share distribution of income.
2.1.2 Size distribution of income
Sngh & Maddala (2008) the personal or size distribution of income is the measures most
commonly used by economist. It simply deals with individual or household and the total income
that they received. The way in which that income was received is not considered.. What matter is
how much each earns irrespective of whether the income was derived solely from employments
or come also from other source such as interest, profit, rents, gifts and inheritance.

2.1.3. Functional or factors share distribution of income

Acemoglu, (2002) the factional or factors share distribution of income attempt to explain the share
of total national income that each of the factors of production (land, labor, capital and
entrepreneur) received in the form of rent, wage, interest and profit respectively.

2.1.4. Cause of income inequality

A). Difference in ability

People are different widely in education, intelligence, motivation, energy and talent. This
difference leads to increase income differences. A person who is more efficient than others gates
a higher payment. There may be difference in people having the same qualifications. Some
people may be more intelligent, hardworking and resourceful. Thus, the may be in high scale of
social value and earn more in the same occupation .Many people believe that, difference in
ability such as intelligence, motivation, and strength are largely innate play a significant role in
determining UN individual income. Individual with higher ability are in greater demand
increasing wage of those who have them. People have different mental and physical ability might
also operate efficiency within society in general (Jasper and Olav , 2007).

B). Difference in wealth accumulation

Those who are already hold wealth have the means to invest new source of wealth or to
otherwise leverage the accumulation of wealth. Thus, they are beneficial of the new wealth. Over
time, wealth condition can significantly contribute to the persistence of income inequality within
society. Wealth concentrations are effects of inter generational income inequality. The rich tend
to provide the offspring with the better education increasing their chance of achieving high
income (Goda & Stockhammer (2017).

C). Difference in age

Young persons who enter the job market as a fresher and old people who retire from service,
have lower incomes than those in mind career (Jhingan, 2004).
D). Existence of non-computing groups

The existence of non-computing groups in every society is another cause of income inequality.
Those groups can be classified in to five district groups:

• The unskilled workers like ordinary labor that carry earth, sand and bricks in
construction work.

• The semi-skilled workers like those who can mix sand and cement in the required
proportion.

• The skilled workers who require special training and skills like, the mechanic, the
locomotive, driver and the plumber.

• The clerical workers who possess some minimum academic qualifications

And the professional groups such as the lawyer, the physician, the teacher, the
actors, and the economists. There are vast income differences in these groups and
also within each group. But, they are more pronounced in the last group.

E). Difference in risk, uncertainty and security

Occupation differs in risk, uncertainty and safety. These differences are reflected in earnings.
People prefer government jobs due to greater security. On the other hand, jobs in private
organization carry risk and uncertainty. Employees in government jobs earn fewer customers in
parts of private industries.

F). Difference in environment and opportunity

Environment is one of important factory that determines individual’s income. People who born
and live in a better life environment have better opportunities. On the other hand, children born
of poor parents living are slums, getting bad food, having poor health and bad educational
facilities. They get low income when they grow up. The vicious circle of such children begins at
birth but, continue through their life. Thus, income inequality occurs because of inequality of
opportunity of education and environment.

G). Immobility of factors

Immobility of factors is another cause of income inequalities. A person with the request
qualification is may not like to make some high salaried job in some other parts of the country.
Initial, family are familiar association’s attachment to particular place, the cost of investment to
the new place and the lack of confidence in adjusting one’s self to the new surroundings are
some factors which hinder mobility.

H). Regional disparities

Income inequalities are also caused by regional disparities. Some regions are backward because
of lack of natural resource, or adverse topography and this failed to provide sufficient
employment opportunities to their residents and whole income remains low as compared with
persons living in developed regions. Such disparities are found in all countries weather they are
developed or developing.

I). Inheritance

The system of inheritance is found in the capitalist and socialist. It perpetuates rather than causes
inequalities of income and wealth the wall to do pass on their movable and immovable wealth to
their descendant before and after their death. Thus, the heirs of such person inherit wealth and
income without making any effort and become “functions less property owners”. But, the wise
among the business community expand the inherent wealth and increase their income manifold
there by further increasing income inequalities (Hager & Hilbig , 2019).

J) Private property

The institution of private also perpetuates income inequalities in capitalist country. It is the
highly paid who are in the position to save and buy land, property start some business or run the
factory invest in security indulge speculation. All such investment gives raise to further income
in form of rent, profit or interest. Some people have much and some people get less than others.

K, Unemployment, under unemployment and disguised unemployment: - because of

population pressure, rapid growth of population and inability to work leads to slow pace of
economic expansion. Unemployment, under unemployment and disguised unemployment has
been increasing poor countries with wide spread distribution of income.

2.2 Measurement of income inequality

1. Lorenz curve: This curve shows the actual quantitative relationship between the percentage of
the total income they did in fact receiving during, say, a given year. . The more the Lorenz line
curves away from the diagonal (perfect equality), the greater the degree of inequality represented
(Todaro, 2002)

2. Gin coefficient: It is the final and very convenient shorthand summary measure of the relative
degree of income inequality in a country can be obtained by calculating the ratio of the area
between the diagonal and the Lorenz curve divided by the total area of the half square in which
the curve lies. Gin coefficient are aggregate inequality measure and vary anywhere from
0(perfect equality to 1 (perfect inequality). However ,although Gini coefficients provide useful
information on levels and changes in relative income inequality based on past and present shapes
of the Lorenz curve , a problem arises when Lorenz curve cross, as in the case of dualistic
development modern-sector enlargement( Todaro, 1997)

3. Kuznets Ratio: This ratio simply deals with individuals personal or households’ total income
they received. Economists arrange all individuals by ascending personal income and then divided
the total population into distinct groups or size based on the income level they received. It is a
common measure of income inequality is the ratio of the income received by the richest and
income received by the poorest ( Todaro, 2002).

2.3. Empirical literature review

Current global income inequality is probably greater than it has been in human history. There is
some debate ate about whether it is getting better. Currently the rich 1% of the people in the
world receives as much as bottom 57%. The nation between the average of top 5% in the world
to the bottom 5% increasing from 78 to 144 in 1993. The richest 25% world’s population
receives 75% of the world’s income, even adjusting for purchasing power. The poorest 75% of
the world’s population share just 25% of the world income. Between the end of Second World
War (WWII) and late, 1970 this trend has reversed. The top 1% of household receives 8.9% of
per tax income in 1976. In 2003, the top 1% share the national income peaked at 23%. The only
other year since 1913 that wealth has claim such a large share of national income. In 1928 when
top 1% share 23.9% in 2008, the top 1% share had more than double 21% (united nation human
report, 2004). Developing countries distribution of income is typically unequal and much more
equal in developed countries. Poor countries generally have highest Gin-coefficient which
spends between 0.35 to 0.60, with extreme at 0.25 and 0.65 while rich countries generally have
low Gin-coefficient most under 0.38. According to this report, the lowest Gin-coefficient which
is under 0.38 can be found continent of Europe which the highest Gin-coefficient found in
continent of Africa which can be around 0.65. According to report, the greatest degree of income
inequality in developing countries is appears largely due to highest share of income received the
richest 5% of income receipting. According to published by world bank in 2007, developing
countries such as central Africa, Angola, Mozambique have Gin-coefficient index equal to 0.56,
0.95 and 0.46 respectively while developed countries like Japan, united kingdom(UK) and
United states(US) relatively lower Gin-coefficient equal to 0.20, 0.36 and 0.24 respectively. This
indicates greater equality of income among population of developed countries than developing
countries (World Bank report, 2008).
2.4. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Income inequality is not a one country problem but it is a problem of all countries. And its severity is
higher in low income countries than developed countries. Income inequality problem is caused by many
factors such as: difference on education level, inheritance , unemployment, gender discrimination and
soon. Those factors leads to income inequality and in turn this leads to robbery, theft, corruption and
ultimately consequences uncertainty of the economy. Due to this finally growth or development is
undermined and caused low level of living of a people.

CHAPTER THREE
3. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
3.1. Description of the study area
The study was emphasis particularly in Burie town. This town is one of the towns in Amhara regional
state in Ethiopia part of western Gojam zone. Burie town is surrounded by the following kebele. Those
areshaqua in west, Tengha in south, wangedam in East and Windigi in North, this town is located from the
capital city of Addis Ababa at distance 411km.This town has area of 118.52km 2, longitude and latitude
10042ꞌN37 4ꞌ/10.7000N37.060E. Burie has a total population of 160, 246 of whom 81, 599 are men and 78,
647 are women. 124,934 are urban inhabitants, of whom 63,711 are men and 61,183 are women. The rest
of population i.e. 35, 312 of whom 17,848 are men and 17,463 are women are living at rural kebeles
around Burie (Burie wereda plan commission, 2015).

3.2. Demographic characteristics

Based on central statistical agency in 2015.Burie town has an estimated total household’s population of
160,246 of whom 81,599 were men and 78,647 were women. The plurality of the inhabitants was
Ethiopian orthodox Christianity and there are few Muslims and protestant beliefs.

3.3. Source of data and its collection method

For this study both primary and secondary data was used. The first is primary sources which was
gathered from the households of the town through questionnaires. The secondary source of data
was collected from reviewing available literature, books, journal and documents, published and
unpublished material.

3.4 Sampling techniques and sample sizes

We were intended to collect data from four kebele of Burie town, which contains totally eight
kebeles. We were apply probability sampling methods of simple random sampling. Because
studying the whole kebeles needs more finance, and take more time and it is difficult to get
available data from each kebele.To give equal chance we were selected four kebeles by using
simple random sampling techniques, namely: kebele 04, kebele 01, kebele 05 and kebele
08.Thus probability sampling methods are suitable to take samples from each kebele. Then, to
collect data from identified kebele,we were applied simple random sampling and collected data
from respondents. Allocation of samples in each kebele was determined by using the Yamane
sample size formula as follows:Burie town comprises of 8 kebeles and total populations are
160,246. (Brie wereda plan commission office, 2015)

The formula of Yamane s: n=N/1+N(e2)

Where: n=sample size

N=total population of four kebele

E=error term, e=10%

The researcher used e=10%, to reduce sample size because of time and budget constraints

N= 69610

n=69610/1+69610(0.1)2

n=69610/696.11 =99.9=100

The proportional formula which helps to select unbiased and desirable number of observation is
like this: Ni= (n/N) NS, where:

Ni= total number of observation in one kebele

n=the total number of people in one kebele

N=the total number of people in four kebele

NS=the total number of sample size

Therefore, using the above technical formula the proportional number of respondents from each
kebele as follows

From kebele 01= (20866/69610) (100) = 30

From kebele 04= (31300/69610) (100) = 45

From kebele 05(wangedam) =(10110/69610)(100) = 15

From kebele tengeha (08)= (7334/69610) (100) = 10

Total =100

3.5. Methods of data analysis

In order to demonstrate the level of income and income inequality in the town
descriptive statistical method was employed. Quantitative data was presented through
percentage, curves(leorenz curve ), ratio(kuznot ratio) and tables while qualitative measure of
data presented in the sentence and statement form.

CHAPTER FOUR
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
For the study purpose, questionnaires was prepared for households. The detail information
obtained from these households summarized as the following

General back ground of the information of the respondents

Table 4.1 General back ground of respondents

No Variable Description No of %age Income %age income

respondent share share

1 Sex Male 52 52 349950 54.26

Female 48 48 295000 45.74

Total 100 100 644950 100

2 Age 18-65 89 89 517249.9 80.2

Above 65 11 11 127700.1 19.8

Total 100 100 644950 100

4 Educational Illiterate 0 _ 0 _
status
1st-8th grade 27 27 58819.44 9.12

9th-10th grade 22 22 99451.29 15.42

 11th-12th 16 16 90035.02 13.96
grade

T tie 0 0 0 0

Diploma 16 16 105126.85 16.3

Degree 10 10 117187.42 18.17

Master 8 8 174329.97 27.03

Phd and 0 0 0 0
above

Total 100 100 644950 100

Source own survey, 2023

From the above table 4.1 we see that the number of male 52% of total sample and the share
54.26 percent of income share from the total income of 644950. The rest of 45.74% of total
income received by the females. This shows that majority of income or wealth in the hands of
male in the town. It is clear that majority of the people in the town is on working age. The age of
18-65 years of the sample shows that those are working age share the highest income 80.2 from
total income of 100%. It is also that most of the people in the town are educated from the total
respondents 27 are between 1-8 but they received lowest income share of 9.12 and diploma
holders receives highest income of 16.3%followed by grade 11-12 who receive 13.96% of the
total income. And also master holders received 27.03% of total income in greater amount. As
result having lower educational level individual have lower skills analyzing capacity. Low job
opportunity, inability to apply modern techniques which all will deteriorate their productive and
their income earning. Due to this educational level difference there is income inequality in burie
town.

Table 4.2 living standard of the respondents

No Living No of %age Income share %age share

standard respondents respondents of income

1 <3500 48 48 68450 10.61

2 3500_10000 24 24 128000 19.85

 3 >10000 28 28 448500 69.54

Total 100 100 644950 100

Source own survey, 2023

From above the table 4.2 the data shows that 48% of the respondents’ says that their living
standard is at lower level which are the highest number of respondents that share their lowest
income of 10.61%of the total income of 100% and 28% of the respondents says that their living
standard are at highest level they share the largest income of 69.54% of the total income. From
the above table here we were concluded that in the town majority of people live in lower living
standard and share of the lowest income.

sTable 4.3 the respondent’s response on engagement in income generating activities

Are you engage in Response No of respondents %age

income activities
Yes 82 82

No 18 18

Total 100 100

Source own survey, 2023

From the above table 4.4, 82% of respondents replied that are engage in income generating
activity and 18% of the sample says they are not engage in income generating activity because
some are retired and some are not gain suitable job . Here, we conclude that majority of the
people are engage they income generating in Burie town.

4.2 Source of income of the respondents

The distribution of national wealth and income may be analyzed under the theory of personal
distribution and the theory of functional distribution. Personal income distribution refers to the
size of income received or earned by individual irrespective of how it is earned or its resource. It
focuses“how much is earned not how it is earned”. Functional distribution is based on how
income is earned. It refers to the source of income that individuals earn. In any given economy
individual earn income according to their contribution to the generation aggregate income and
output. The level of income earned by individual household depends on what factors of
production. Here personal income may be from daily work, giving civil services, commerce or
trade, interest, rent, pension and so on. In this study we were tries to arrange all individuals
income in ascending order and then divide the total population in to 5 distinct groups according
to ascending income levels and determine what proportion of the total income is received by
each income group. Note: the table 4.4 arranged in 4 columns; column 1is the number of the
class, column 2 is the number of respondent, column 3, shows the share of income of 20
individuals, and column 4 is represent the share of the 20th individuals from the total income.

Class Number Income interval Share of income in

percentage

I 20 < or = 500 =41663.77 6.46%

II 20 501-2500 = 55852.67 8.66%

III 20 2501-4500=79006.38 12.25%

IV 20 4501-12000 = 138986.725 21.55%

V 20 >12000= 329440.46 51.08%

Total 100 644950 100

Table 4.2.1 cumulative percent of the share of income

Note: The first class shares the lowest income (6.46%) from the total income. The second, third,
fourth and fifth class shares 8.66%, 12.25%, 21.55%, and 51.08% of the total income
respectively. The first and the second classes income interval are very low as compared to the
third, fourth and the last classes. This shows that lower classes income is nearly similarities (no
gap) with each other and in higher income groups there is high income gap between each other.
.4.3 Measurements of income inequality level

► How to examine the level of income inequality?

In this study we were used three types of measurements: such as Lorenz curve, Gini coefficient
and the Kuznets ratio to measure the level of income inequality in Burie town.

4.3.1 Lorenz curve and income inequality

Lorenz curve is one of the ways of analyzing income distribution. Household income distribution
is used to construct what is known as Lorenz curve. The figure below shows how it is done. The
numbers of income recipient are plotted on the horizontal axis in cumulative percentages. The
vertical axis shows the share of the total income received by each percentage of the sample
population. It is also cumulative up to 100% meaning that both axe are equally long. The entire
figure is enclosed in square and a diagonal line is drawn from the lower left corner (the origin) to
the upper right corner. At every point on the diagonal, the percentage of income received is
exactly equal to the percentage of income recipients. In other words, the diagonal line is a
representative of perfect equality in the distribution of income.

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

d
c

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Figure 4.1 Lorenz curve measuring of income inequality

The Lorenz curve shows the actual quantitative relationship between the percentage of incomes
recipients and the percentage of total income they did receive during a given year. The data
shows the bottom 20% of the sample population receives 6.46% of the total income and also the
next bottom 20% of the sample population receives an income 8.66%. This indicates that the
bottom, 40%of the sample population receives 15.12% of the total income and the top income
groups receive an income of 51.08%. The inequality is measured by the vertical distance
between the line of equality (diagonal) and the Lorenz curve. The larger the gap the greater was
the degree of inequality and the smaller the gap the narrower was the degree of income
inequality. Thus we can conclude from the Lorenz curve plotted above which is far away from
the diagonal perfect equality line since there is greater degree of income inequality in Burie
town.

Gini coefficient can be calculated as the area between its Lorenz curve and the line of perfect
equality. A Gini coefficient of 1 indicates maximum inequality, as a single person in a society has
all of the income and the remainder of the population has none; a Gini coefficient of 0 indicates
maximum equality, as everyone has exactly the same income. In reality, Gini coefficients range
from 0 to 1.
4.3.2 The Kuznets ratio and income inequality
It is the most common method of measuring income inequality between individuals. In this study
we were tried to show the income inequality between individuals by using Kuznets ratio. It is the
ratio of the income received by the rich 20% and the bottom 40% of the population. It is measure
of degree of inequality between two extreme of very rich and very poor individuals in the Burie
town as follows based on table 4.2.1 that is:

K = the percentage income received by the rich 20% / the percentage income received by the
bottom 40%

K = 51.08/15.12

k = 3.38

As the result 3.38 indicates that, the top 20% of the population receives income of 3.38 times
greater than that of the bottom 40% of the population. The ratio shows that the existence of
higher degree of income inequality between individuals.

4.4. Income generating activity of the respondents

In any given economy individual or households earn income according to their contribution to
the generation of aggregate income. The level of income earned by individual households spends
on what factor of production, the quantity of the factor and price of the factors. Generally
households derive their income from three basic sources. There are incomes from wage or salary,
from property and from transfer payments. Different wage rates are paid to employees for their
labor in different labor markets, because people possess different skills and talent which have
influence on the level of income of individual.

Table 4.5 income generating activity of the respondents

No Activity No of %age income share of %age share

respondents respondents of income

1 Daily labor 20 20 35988.21 5.58

2 Own business 45 45 394580.41 61.18

 3 Government 26 26 136213.44 21.12
organization

4 NGO 9 9 78167.94 12.12

5 Other private 0 0
business

6 If any 0 - 0 -

Total 100 100 644950 100

Source own survey, 2023

According to the above table 4.5,45% of the respondents receives their income (61.18%) from
own business which is the highest source income of the respondents, 20% of the respondents
receives their income from daily labor but their share of income is the lowest from the other
which accounts 5.58% of the total income . Finally, the lower number of respondents that means
9% of the respondents receives higher income than that of the respondents who receives their
income from daily labor. In contrasts to governments employees, the amounts of income
received by the business person depends on their experience related to how to trade , how to deal
with the customers, the amounts of finance and quality of asset possessed.

4.5. Measuring of income inequality

4.5.1. Income distribution pattern of respondents
What we are trying to see is how income is distributed among individuals irrespective of how it is earned.
The table below represents the income level received by the individuals.

Table 4.6 monthly income group of the respondents (in birr)

No Income group No of respondents %age of Cumulative

respondents percentage

1 <3000 20 20 20

2 3000_4000 15 15 35

3 4001_5000 5 5 40

4 5001_6000 14 14 54

5 6001_7000 6 6 60
 6 7001_8000 13 13 73

7 8001_9000 7 7 80

8 9001_1000 12 12 92

9 >10000 8 8 100

Total 100 100

Source: own surveys, 2023

As we observe from the table 4.7 above, 20% of the respondents receive the income of birr of greater than
9000, those of the respondents of 80 of the respondents receives less than 9000 birr. The small proportion
of the respondents 5% receives an income of between 4001-5000. Thus, we can also understand from the
data that more than half or 54% of the respondents receives the income group of less than 6000. From the
above table we observed that majority households share lowest income and highest share of income is on
the lower portion of respondent. So there is income gab distribution in the town.

4.6. Cause of income inequality

4.6.1. Cause of income inequality
Income inequality an economy can be arise from different factors such as difference in
educational level, systems of inheritance, difference occupation, difference income distribution
and difference economic finance.

Table 4.7 attitude of respondents towards cause of income inequality

No Factors No of respondents %age

1 Difference 15 15
educational level

2 Difference in job 51 51
occupation

3 Difference in 9 9
income distribution

4 Systems of 25 25
 inheritance

5 If any 0 _

Total 100 100

Source: own survey, 2023

According to the above table 4.8 the highest number of respondents or 51% responds that the
cause of income inequality in the town due to different job occupation. This kind of factors is
highly related to income generating activates. Next to this 9% of the respondents responds that
the cause of income inequality is come from difference in income distribution. This is highly
related to the income received from a broad as transfer payment and government pay according
to their ability and etc. make the problem of income inequality. And from the above table we
reveal that 25% and 15%of the respondents responds that the cause of income inequality in Burie
town is due to the system of inheritance and difference in educational level respectively. The
former is individuals able to enjoy doing work. Thus inheritance responsible for the existence of
income inequality in the town. The latter is some things different in skill ability gained through
education; people also have different qualities and talents. People who are more educated
received or earn higher income than those who are not educated or those who have low education
level. Hence, different in education level the factors that cause income inequality

4.6.2. The other cause of income inequality

Gender discrimination

Table 4.8 gender discrimination

Respond Number of respondents Percentage%

Yes 79 79%

No 21 21%

Total 100 100

Source: own survey, 2023

As we observe from the above table 4.7, the highest number 79%of the respondents have said
that gender discrimination at work place is the main cause of income inequality disparity among
households and this leads to income inequality among the society as whole.

Furthermore, the respondents have for warded different reasons for this gender discrimination at
work place among the male and female. Firstly, the people prefer to hire male worker than
female workers because they considered females are weak as compare to male. Secondly,
attitudinal problem toward female, that is they consider female are inferior to male in different
aspects and so on. According to this survey above the 21% respondents responded that
discrimination that not tends to income inequality.

4.6.3. Measuring of income inequality

It must be started at the outset that a country whether it is capitalist or communist can reduce
income inequality and wealth can be grouped under two leads income by reducing income of the
rich and by the rising income of the lower group. To reducing income of the rich by using
progress taxation, restriction inheritance, prevention and over monopoly power etc. to raise the
income the low income groups through providing social insurance and social service (Jhingan,
2004)

Table 4.9. measure of reducing income inequality in the town.

Measuring of the reduction of income inequality No of Percentage %

respondents

Giving awareness to the society toward creation of 22 22%

remedy

Creating additional education opportunity 31 31%

Reduction of the wealth(redistribution of wealth) 18 18%

Creating sufficient job opportunity 29 29%

Total 100 100%

Source: own survey, 2023

As we observe from the above table 4.9, the highest number 31%of respondents responded that
to reduce income inequality problem, education plays key roles. Education is a most important
factor which determines the amounts of income received by individual. Those who are educate
earn more income while uneducated earn low income. Therefore, poor are unable to educate
themselves as well as their children in the town due to financial problems. According to
respondents, government should assist the society by funding the poor and educate their kinds.
This can reduce the problems of income inequality in the town.

According to the survey, the next highest 29%of the respondents have responded that, lack of
sufficient job opportunity in the town is the main problem. According to the respondents to
reduce this income inequality some proportion of labor force are observed and create multiple
effects. By this tends the income of the society will improved downstream.

According to finding 22%of respondents are stated difference in ability is the main problems in
the town. To reduce this income inequality in the town, giving awareness to the society toward
the creation of remedy rather than looking for job.

Because the society hard working habits, they have no motivation to create a job because of the
ignore the task mean that they rank job by saying inferior or superior job. To reality there is no
inferior or superior job. Therefore, to reduce this bad culture of ignoring job and looking for job
rather than creating job to earn income for them themselves.

According to the survey, 18% of respondents have responded that to reduce this income
inequality through distribution wealth. To redistribute this wealth among the society in equal
manner, government should adapt different policy maker like progressive taxation system.

Table 5. Other measuring of reducing income inequality in the town

No Percentage Measures of reducing incomeResponsible persons

Respondents inequality

1 43 Creating new job Society themselves and government

2 27 Expand small scale micro-Governments

enterprises

3 21 Invite investors, merchants andGovernments

traders

4 9 Create incentives to the poor by Governments

providing finance and other
 facilities

Total 100

Source: Own survey and Computation, 2023

Table 5. measures of reducing income inequality

According to the respondent the whole society and government are responsible to narrow the gap
of income inequality between the rich and the poor through under taking different actions. About
43 % of the respondent said that the society themselves can reduce income inequality by creating
new job because without societies action there is no more change (development).

About 27 % of the respondent said that the government should expand small scale micro-
enterprises because it is an important factor for the creation of employment among the poor. And
21 % of the respondent argued that government should invite investors, merchants and traders
through good administration will create a new job opportunity and a flow of income for the poor
family of Burie town. Finally,9% respondent’s claim that governments should be creates
incentives to the poor by providing finance like credit, subsidy and other facilities in the town.

CHAPTER FIVE
1. CONCLUTION AND RECOMANDATION
5.1. CONCLUTION
The income inequality problem has been the world as whole. It retards or undermined
sustainable economic development of the country. Income inequality is not only the problem of
developing country rather it is international problem which exist every corner of the world.

Developing country, like Ethiopia, experiences the problem of inequality of income distribution.
From point of view of economic growth also increasing inequality provoke dissatisfaction and
frustration among the poor, which may eliminate in distribution civil work, destroying the social
and political basis of economic activity.

In Burie town various economic activities are under taken by the society as main source of
income. Those activities are trade, agriculture, daily work and employment as finding indicate
what every the source of income is low. The majority of society receive less than <3500birr
which is relatively low while small portion of the society receive an income of 10,000 and above
birr which is relatively high when we compare with average income of the poor portion of the
society. Those section of society receive low level of income are daily workers who receive low
level of income because their low level of education and skills. And the small sections of society
categorized under high income group are business men who gain this high income from their
highly profitable assets. According to finding, the factors which are responsible for income
inequality are difference in ability, difference in wealth accumulation, difference in education
level, inheritance and unemployment. In addition to these gender discrimination at work place
between male and female is also the another reason which leads to income inequality among the
society. Income inequality respective of receive it is being in urban or rural area is one
determinants of social welfare. Social welfare depends positively on the level of per capital
income. But it depends negatively on income inequality. The extreme income inequality leads to
economic inefficiency, low productivity under development and so on.

According to the finding, income inequality is responsible for unequal distribution of education
opportunity: financial problem is obstacle even if education is freely available to the society. The
poor low earner is unable to purchase stationary materials and other miscellaneous expenses.
Income inequality is also caused by concentration of economic and political power in hand the
rich. Finally such extreme income inequality in the town also caused the expansion of robber and
theft.

Additionally, income inequality undermines economic development. Extreme income inequality

leads to economic inefficiency. Moreover the overall rate of saving in the economy tends to be
lower because of the highest rate of saving is usually found among the middle class.

Since marginal propensity to consume (MPC) of the rich is relatively lower than the poor, the
rich consume small portion of their income. This low level of consumption has negative effects
on production and finally leads to low rate of economic growth.

5.2 Recommendation
According to the finding presented in chapter three there is a high degree of income inequality in
Burie town which has resulted from different factor; therefore in order to reduce the problem . We are
highly initiated to recommend the following points.

To reduce the problem of income inequality there should be nation wide policy for the different
sectors of the economy. This is which increase income received by the poor section of the society
and for the poor to get access to run small scale business activity, the expansion of both private
and public institutional is very crucial.
 The governments is provide direct transfer payment and public provisions of goods and service
to the poor are another important instrument t reduce inequality of income.

Income inequality can also result s from accumulation of wealth that the rich people pass to their
heirs or children through the system of inheritance. Thus in order to redistribute this wealth
among the society in equal manner, government officials should adopt different policies like
progressive taxation, property tax and etc which should helps to redistribution of this wealth.
Progressive taxation means, charging high income tax those who earn high income and vice
versa. this income taken from rich should be transferred to the poor by government through
allocating those incomes to poor public expenditures, that is free education free health service
and infrastructure

Reducing unemployment: the government is responsible body to create job opportunities to

those who are unemployed by expanding public and private sector investment activities. If the
rich expand their business, like manufacturing service and other forms of sectors the poor can get
income through way of employment. Therefore, the gap would be narrow.

Giving incentive to the poorer: Government should give guarantee for the low income part of
the society to get assistance and aid in the form of income. When government expand free
education, low rent housing social services and others which leads people going to save and the
lowers gap between the rich and the poor people.

Education policies are key: In a world in which technological change is increasing productivity
and simultaneously mechanizing jobs, raising skill levels is critical for reducing the dispersion of
earnings. Improving education quality, eliminating financial barriers to higher education, and
providing support for apprenticeship programs are all key to boosting skill levels in both trade
able and non-trade able sectors. These policies can also help improve the income prospects of
future generations as educated individuals are better able to cope with technological and other
changes that directly influence productivity levels. In advanced economies, with an already high
share of secondary or tertiary graduates among the working-age population, policies that
improve the quality of upper secondary or tertiary education would be important. In our
countries with currently low levels of education attainment, policies that promote more equal
access to basic education (for example, cash transfers aimed at encouraging better attendance at
primary schools, or spending on public education that benefits the poor) could help reduce
inequality by facilitating the accumulation of human capital, and making educational
opportunities less dependent on socio- economic circumstances.

Fiscal policy can be an important tool for reducing inequality.

Cited in Norris(2015) Fiscal policy plays a critical role in ensuring macro financial stability and
can thus help avert/minimize crises that disproportionately hurt the disadvantaged population. At
the same time, fiscal redistribution, carried out in a manner that is consistent with other
macroeconomic objectives, can help raise the income share of the poor and middle class, and
thus support growth. Fiscal policy already plays a significant role in addressing income
inequality, but the re-distributive role of fiscal policy could be reinforced by greater reliance on
wealth and property taxes, more progressive income taxation, removing opportunities for tax
avoidance and evasion, better targeting of social benefits while also minimizing efficiency costs,
in terms of incentives to work and save. In addition, reducing tax expenditures that benefit high-
income groups most and removing tax relief such as reduced taxation of capital gains, stock
options, and carried interest would increase equity and allow a growth-enhancing cut in marginal
labor income tax rates in some countries.

6.Time and budget plan

6.1 Budget Plan
N O Items of Unit Quantity Unit To t a l
expenditure measurement price Price

1 Transport (taxi) Trip 8 500 500

2 Telephone Cost 50 50

3 Internet cost 50 50

4 Miscellaneous 1000 1000

Total 1600

6.2 Time Plan

Time schedule for doing research

NO Activities December January February March Apri May june

performed l

1 Title selection ,,
 2 Introduction ,,

3 Literature review ,,

4 Methodology ,,

5 Comment Advisor ,,

6 Proposal ,,
submission

7 Data collection ,,

8 Data analysis ,,

9 Conclusion and ,,,

recommendation

10 comment Advisor ,,
about research

11 ready for over ll ,,

research
presentation

12 Examine ,,

REFERENCE
• Collins internet –linked dictionary of economics, 2005, Great Britain

• Michael Todaro, (2003), Development of economics, New Delhi, India

• M.L.Jhingan, (2004),principle of economics second edition, New Delhi, India

• A.P Thruway,(2006), Growth and development, eight edition

• Economics development, New York University, the population council and the George
Washington University, 10th edition.

• Ethiopian economic association volume 111(2004), poverty related issues, Addis Abeba.
• Norton (2010), Economics of development 7th edition, New York.
• Michael p .Todaro (2010), Traditional Human Development Index.
• Micheal p .Todaro and Stephen C .Smith (2009), Development economics 10 th edition. New
York University and the population council, and The George Washington University.
• Yusiro hay, (2004) personal income distribution.

• Boccanfuso, D. and S. T. Kabore, 2003. Croissance, Inegalite et Pauvrete dans les Annees
1990 Au Burkinafaso et au Senegal, To be published in <<Revue d’Economic du
Development>>.

• Andy Mckay(Professor of Development Economics, University of Sussex, UK 2016)

• Milanovic (2005), world development report, ''The world bank and Oxford University
Press.''
• Befekadu Degefe and Berhanu Nega (eds), 2000, Annual Report on Ethiopia Economy,
1999/2000. Addis Ababa; Ethiopia Economic Association

• Erik son Robert, and John H. Goldthoorpe,2002 “Inter generational Inequality :A

Sociological Perspective .” journal of economic perspectives.

• Blau, Francine D, and Lawyerence M Khan, ‘‘Women's Work and Wages.’’The new pal
grave dictionary of economics 8(2008)

• Kuznets, Simon. “Economic growth and income inequality American economic review; and
Kuznets, Simon,1963;Quantitative aspect of the economic growth of nations :vill
distribution of income by size.’’ Economic Development and Cultural Change (1955).

• Sorensen, Jasper B, and Olav sorenson, “corporate demography and income inequality.”
American Sociological Review.

• Deaton, Angus S, and Christian Paxson. “Morality, income and income inequality over time
in Britain and the United states.’’ Perspectives on the Economic of Aging . University of
Chicago press, 2004.

• Burie wereda plan commission office, 2023

• Debla norris, Ms Era, etval. Causes and consequencec of income income inequality: A
global perspective. International Monetary Fund,2015

• Singh,S. K & Maddala, G. S.(2008). A finction for size distribution of incomes. Mofeling
income distribution.

• Acemoglu, D. (2002). Technical Change, Inequality, and the Labour Market. Journal of
Economics Literature.
• Goda, T., Onaran, O., & Stockhamer, E.(2017). Income inequality and wealth concentration
in the recent crisis. Develooment and Change.

• Hager, A. , and Hilbig, H.(2019). Do inheritance customs affect poletical and social
inequalitu?. American Journal of Poletical science.

APPENDEX
DEBREMARKOS UNIVERSITY

BURIE CAMPUS DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Research questionnaires:

This research questioner is prepared by fourth year economics students in Burie campus to gather
the reliable data on the determinant of income inequality in Burie town. So, dear respondent are
kindly requested to provide necessary information carefully for the question listed below. The
secret will be requested for all information given.

NB: Dear respondents at the time of answering the question by putting“sign in the box’’.
Background information of the respondent

1. Sex A) Male B) Female

2. Age A) Above 18 years

3. Educational statues A) Illiterate B) Primary C) Secondary

D) T tie E) Diploma F) Degree G) Master H) PHD and above

4. Specify your level of income A) (below 35,000)

B) ( 3500-10,000)

C) (above 10,000)

5. Have you engage income earning activity? A) Yes B) No

6. If your answers question no 5 is no why you are not engaged?

A) Based on my interest

B) I don’t gained suitable job

C) I am retired

D) If any specify

7. If your answer for no 5 is yes which type generate activity engaged?

A) Daily labor B) Own business C) Government organization

D) NGOs E) Other private business

8. In which category your monthly income is belong?

A) Below 3000 C) 4001_5000

B) 3000_4000 D)
5001_6000 . E) 6001_7000
F) 7001_8000

G) 8001_9000 H) 9001_10,000

I) Above 10,000

9. What is the secret behind that make or cause your income different from others?

A) Difference in educational level

B) Difference in job occupation

C) Difference in income distribution

D) System of inheritance

E) If anyn specify

10. There is gender discrimination at work place? A) Yes B) No

11. What is your answer to reduce income inequality from listed below?

A) Giving awareness to the society to ward creation of remedy

B) Creating additional education opportunity

C) Reduction of wealth( redistribution of wealth)

D) Creating sufficient job opportunity

E) If any specify

12. Who is responsible for reduction of income inequality?

A) By creating new job I) Government II) Society III) Both

B) By expand small scale micro enterprise I) Government II) Society III) Both

C) Invite investors, merchants and traders I) Government II) Society III) Both

D) By creating incentive to the poor by providing finance and other facilities I) Government

II) Society III) Both