Add Gini coeff into Vietnam script

_drivers-of-inequality-vietnam.qmd

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
 
 -----
 
-* Economic restructuring and trade liberalization further drives economy towards wage work, service work the manufacturing sectors.
+* Economic restructuring and trade liberalization further drives economy towards wage work, service work, the manufacturing sectors.
 * Structural changes drove poverty down in absolute terms, but leave those in vulnerable positions consistently at-risk of slipping into or worsening existing poverty.
 * Economic inequality in Vietnam intersectional between ethnic minorities, rural populations, regional and gendered dimensions.
 * Ethnic minorities increase in economic inequality, driven by worse returns on assets (human capital and land) and worse access to endowments (land and educational infrastructure).
@@ -30,13 +30,17 @@ On the other hand, Le et al. [-@Le2021] suggest a slight increase in overall inc
 At the same time, the ones most affected by poverty through welfare inequalities stay unaltered, as do largely the primary factors accompanying it:
 There is severe persistent poverty among ethnic minorities in Vietnam [@Baulch2012],
 concomitant with low education and skills, more prevalent dependency on subsistence agriculture, physical and social isolation, specific disadvantages which become linked to ethnic identities and a greater exposure to natural disasters and risks [@Kozel2014].
+The country's overall estimated Gini coefficient fluctuates between 0.42 and 0.44 between the years 2010 and 2018, with the highest inequality in the the Central Highlands in 2016,
+though absolute income may be rising, with the top quintile having 9.2 times the income of the lowest quintile in 2010 and 9.8 times in 2016 [@Le2021].
 Economic inequality and poverty in Vietnam thus underlies an intersectional focus, between ethnic minorities, regional situations, rural-urban divides and gendered lines,
 one which exogenous shocks can rapidly exacerbate as the example of the COVID-19 pandemic has recently shown [@Ebrahim2021].
 
+<!--
 * estimated Gini coeff, overall income distribution: [@Le2021]
     * fluctuating 0.42-0.44 (2010-2018)
     * highest in Central highlands (2016)
     * absolute income inequality may be rising, top quintile 9.2 times income lowest quintile (2010) to 9.8 times (2016) (Hung 2019)
+-->
 
 <!-- rural inequality -->
 In the 1990s, as the initial stages of the Doi Moi reform bore fruit with economic growth,
@@ -63,13 +67,16 @@ rural inequality indeed increased over this time.
 Wage income and family business income were the main drivers of overall inequality in 2002 (accounting for over 30% of income but 60% of inequality) and remittances add a small share on top,
 which, while decreased in effect (risen to 42% of total income),
 remain majorly correlated with income distributions and thus income inequality.
+@Bui2019 confirm this with a Gini coefficient of 0.36 to 0.39 between 2008 and 2010 which, decomposed into Theil indices for between rural and urban and within rural sectors show that rural-urban inequalities are smaller and decreasing, while within-rural inequalities are large and increasing.
 Thus, while the study points to both more prevalent and equally distributed labor markets and wage labor opportunities,
 these effects apply to the overall population and not just within-rural inequalities which are driven in large part by ethnicity, education and environmental factors.
 
+<!--
 * estimated Gini coeff, rural and urban expenditure: [@Bui2019]
     * 0.36-0.39 (2008-2010), 0.36 (2012)
     * Theil rural-urban between: 0.22-0.19 (2008-2012)
     * Theil rural-rural within: 0.74-0.83 (2008-2012)
+-->
 
 <!-- ethnicity inequality -->
 Ethnic minorities in Vietnam are distinctly over-represented in poverty in addition to often being left behind in the development process, not least due to being extreme representatives of the economic situation of Vietnam's rural population.
@@ -86,9 +93,11 @@ These findings suggest that the primary drivers of rural income inequality are a
 <!-- TODO Find levels of population rural/urban in other sources -->
 In the same vein as the urban-rural divide, Nguyen et al. [-@Nguyen2007] thus argue for structural policy failures which essentially lowered the returns on ethnicity along sectorial dividing lines of education and primary income types.
 
+<!--
 * estimated Gini coeff: rural ethnicities [@Baulch2012]
     * per capita HH expenditure between Kinh and Hoa majority 0.27 (1993, 2004)
     * per capita HH expenditure within minority groups 0.24 (1993), 0.29 (2004) sg increase
+-->
 
 <!-- environmental inequality -->
 While the effect of agriculture on inequality outcomes is an equalizing one,