I am pretty much convinced that literature in this field is rather shortlisted - i would be happy if anyone proves me wrong.

From the perspective of methodology - i would say that classical survey among different groups of population (those who are doing good and those who ended up on low end of life) can give you some basic data on which you can create good and statistically supported model. So the demographic question shall be on positive outcomes (wealth, job positions etc), while the dependent variables shall be concentrated on living environment, the perception of the parents, financial situation in respondents' youth, etc. Looking forward to some update with the results.

 Thank you  Mr Uros for guiding on the methodology side.

I will get to you for more help.

Check out work in USA by Beverly Wilson, Andrew Greenlee, john powell (he doesn't use caps, like e. e. cummings). Related work includesMimi Abramovitz, Claudia Coulton, Julian Chow, For classic work on poverty In the UK see Robert Walker, Peter Townshend, Brian Abel Smith, Charles Boothe.

Our learned colleagues provide insightful and useful suggestions.  I'm writing to add my suggestion, which may already be incorporated by the prior guidance.

My own impression is that while 'opportunity' is somewhat difficult to measure, outcomes are, at least in some cases, less so.  For instance, that women are paid less than men in equivalent positions is pretty well established and fairly easy to measure.  Controlling for education, training, experience and other specialty relate factors, results in strong evidence supporting an opportunity inequality hypothesis.

 At first, this might seem like an exclusively 'economic factors' perspective and unresponsive to your question.  However, given that the contribution to the organization (sector independent) of a given position is equal, then non-economic factors, which could be identified with appropriate variables, may emerge as the primary drivers of the income inequality.  

I think it might be appropriate to look at Amartya Sen's "Development as Freedom". In this work he deals with freedom as enhancing the range of choices of individuals.In terms of looking at inequality of opportunities, you might find Akhter Hameed Khan's work "From Comilla to Orangi" published by OUP very informative as well. AHK identified four barriers in the way of low income communities accessing opportunities in private and public sector; namely psychological, social, technical and financial barriers. You can find a brief description of these barriers in my paper on *Governance as Facilitating Engagement" at Research Gate. 

Thank you all learned scholars for the comments and guiding me regarding the topic.

Hi! You could use Gini Index!!!Amatya Sen studies are worth in this issue. Also, Joseph Stiglitz book " The Price of Inequality"

A debate comparing circumstances versus efforts is in my opiniomn similar to a debate comparing rationaly and bounded rationality in (development, spatial, social) planning. In general this is a crucial difference, namely how much can one actually and rationally and methodologically plan, foresee, forecast, anticipate, decide, steer or control and how much of the future developments and choice is part of circumstances, context, coincidence, changing environments, windows of opportunity, misfortunate, good/bad luck, etc.  Evaluating this is a question of scale - how big a social (actor) network is one accepting to include in the research, what is the accepted or assumed variation in social capital, etc.

Overall, I would say full rational behavior or decision making - even in the current digital era of information overload and global connectivity -  is impossible (besides the fact that some of the most valuable things cannot be converted in to digtial things).  and as consequence there is always by definition an exclusion of opportunities and a certain degree of discretionary decision making. Perhaps we should therefore put more emphasis on the phenomena of luck, coincidence, discretionary behavior, handling (un)certainty, handling (mis)fortunates.              

Usually this is measured as the percentage of people moving between income quintiles over time.

If it is found that the income outcomes (which quintile they are in) of children in the next generation across all parent's income quintiles are evenly distributed across all quintiles, this would imply perfect equality of opportunity. (And in fact that is very unlikely even if systems perfectly ensured equality of opportunity because the genetic component is very unlikely to be zero.)

If the income outcomes (which quintile they are in) of children in the next generation are identical to that of their parents across all quintiles, then inequality of opportunity could not be higher.

Many studies on social mobility show the percentage of the population moving between quintiles over time. While this is not a perfect methodology compared to a generatoinal analysis, it allows the researcher to assess whether equality of opportunity is increasing or decreasing over time.

The same analysis could be performed at a percentile level, but the outputs are much easier to digest at the quintile level.

Inquality of opportunity of what? Here in Brasil we discussed about that issues when ex president Lula transfered at least wherewithal as a gift instead of as a right as equity of heritage from Brasil. As an exemple every richness was tooked from the soil.  And the end the marketing made then spent buying  tv cars and so on. without any hope to improve their quality of life or their oportunities of change ways in the future, in the middle or short term. Their still live in the same house, without sanitation their do not make any plan to improve their skills and as the prices of food incresaed a lot I do not know if they have enough food to eat! So You can read a lot of good things we had in Brasil when the sistem took a lot of families form the proverty but I am myself doubt it!

I have been working in informal settlemnts since 1995. as an architect to develop redesign in colective minds.   

So at the begining I would like to say that we should build the Indicators with then! Paying attention in general ideas and carefully the specific moment and local aspects.