Great overview piece. My feeling is that UN consultation on post-2015 inequalities has already moved us beyond the 'absolute ambition sufficiency' view (that is, the view that meeting a sufficiently ambitious absolute target will by definition address inequality). Aside from additional and valuable evidence of the type you present here (looking forward to seeing the final paper!), there is a more fundamental issue. The absolute ambition sufficiency view treats inequality, as you suggest, as simply a part of a mathematical identity: so that addressing inequality is necessary, or otherwise, insofar only as it has an impact on policymakers’ ability to improve the absolute outcomes at the bottom of the distribution. The synthesis report of the inequality consultation, in contrast, is explicit in stating that inequality should be addressed in response to the damage suffered by society, and all within in, so that a targeting response, or indeed one only concerned with absolute outcomes, is by definition insufficient. The crux of this is of course whether one considers inequality to be intrinsically damaging, or only instrumentally so. The evidence across a range of development outcomes points strongly to the former, and hence the absolute ambition sufficiency view seems ill-suited. In terms of measurement, I’d agree with the view that the Gini coefficient is unhelpful (it hides more than it reveals in too many cases, by its oversensitivity to the middle of the distribution) and that we should be concerned with the ratio of outcomes between those at the bottom of the distribution and others. As Andy Sumner and I have written, however, we would propose the Palma: the ratio of outcomes of the top 10% to the bottom 40%: http://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=13982 "For the record, the leaked documents The Guardian saw are merely drafts – the monitoring framework isn’t actually set in stone." I'm hoping that we can read your aside to mean that there is space yet for the Palma in the Bank's framework. And per the inequality consultation, we should hope to see in the post-2015 framework not only a goal on economic and gender inequality but also a set of inequality targets and indicators throughout all the goals (reflecting inequality faced by people living with disability, urban-rural and regional inequalities, ethnolinguistic inequalities, age-based inequalities and gender, as well as income/wealth).