Minimal rights based solidarity

In a model where individuals with different levels of skills exert different levels of effort, we propose to use individuals' minimal rights to divide an extra amount of income generated by a change in the skill profile. Priority is given to individuals with a positive minimal right which ensures that the way redistribution is performed depends on the total sum of income available in society. We characterize two families of Minimal Rights based Egalitarian mechanisms. One family guarantees each individual her claim when claims are feasible. The other family guarantees a non-negative income after redistribution for all individuals

Participation and Solidarity in Redistribution Mechanisms

Following Bossert (1995), we consider a model where personal income depends on two different characteristics: skills and effort. Luttens (2010) introduces claims that individuals have over aggregate income and that only depend on the effort they exert. Moreover, he proposes redistribution mechanisms in which solidarity is based on changes in a lower bound on what every individual deserves according to these claims: the so-called minimal rights (O’Neill 1982). A debatable consequence in one of Luttens’ mechanisms is that “the poorest individuals might up with a negative income” (Luttens 2010); that is, this mechanism does not satisfy participation, which turns out to be incompatible with claims feasibility, under Luttens’ assumptions. We present a new solidarity axiom that is compatible both with participation and claims feasibility, and we provide a mechanism satisfying these properties and our new additive solidarity axiom. Moreover, our mechanism satisfies additional properties, as priority, or respect of minimal rights.This has been partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness funds under Project ECO2013-43119 and by Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Banco Santander and Generalitat de Catalunya under the project 2011LINE-06

Resource allocations with guaranteed awards in claims problems

The notion of lower bound on awards has been introduced in the literature to analyze the establishment of guarantees that ensure a minimum award to each agent involved in situations of conflicting claims, such as the rationing of a resource or the distribution of the assets of a bankrupt firm. Indeed, this concept has a core role in many approaches related to the problem of fair allocation (Thomson in Math Soc Sci 74:41–59, 2015) and a range of such lower bounds have been proposed: the minimal right (Curiel et al. in Z Oper Res 31:A143–A159, 1987), the fair bound (Moulin in Handb Soc Choice Welf 1:289–357, 2002), securement (Moreno-Ternero and Villar in Math Soc Sci 47(2):245–257, 2004) and the min bound (Dominguez in mimeo, 2006). In this context, the key contribution of the current paper is to show that there is a correspondence between lower bounds and rules; i.e., associated to each particular lower bound, we find a specific way of distributing the resources. In doing so, we provide new characterizations for two well known rules, the constrained equal awards and Ibn Ezra’s rules. A dual analysis, by using upper bounds on awards will provide characterizations of the dual of the previously mentioned rules: the constrained equal losses rule and the dual of Ibn Ezra’s rule.Open access funding provided by Universitat Rovira i Virgili. Financial support from Universitat Rovira i Virgili and Generalitat de Catalunya (2018PFR-URV-B2-53) and Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (ECO2016-75410-P (AEI/FEDER, UE), ECO2017-86481-P (AEI/ FEDER, UE) and PID2020-119152GB-I00 (AEI/FEDER, UE)) is acknowledged

Minimal rights based solidarity

In a model where individuals with different levels of skills exert different levels of effort, we propose to use individuals’ minimal rights to divide an extra amount of income generated by a change in the skill profile. Priority is given to individuals with a positive minimal right. We characterize two families of Minimal Rights based Egalitarian mechanisms that implement this solidarity idea. One family guarantees each individual her claim when claims are feasible. The other family guarantees a non-negative income after redistribution for all individuals.minimal rights, solidarity, compensation, claims

A note on Luttens’ Minimal rights based solidarity

Following the approach developed by Luttens (2010), we consider a model where individuals with di fferent levels of skills exert di fferent levels of e ffor. Speci fically, we propose a redistribution mechanism based on a lower bound on what every individual deserves: the so-called minimal rights (O'Neill (1982)). Our re finement of Luttens' mechanism ensures at the same time minimal rights based solidarity, participation (non-negativity) and claims feasibility. Keywords: Redistribution mechanism, Minimal rights, Solidarity, Participation, Claims feasibility. JEL classi fication: C71, D63, D71