50 research outputs found

    Inequality, welfare and monotonicity

    Get PDF
    We stablish a general relationship between the standard form of the individualistic social-welfare function and the "reduced-form" version that is expressed in terms of inequality and mean income. This shows the relationship between the property of monotonicity and the slope of the equity-efficient trade-off. Particularly simple results are available for a large class of inequality measures that includes the Gini. These results do not require differentiability of the social-welfare function

    Inequality, Welfare and Monotonicity

    Get PDF
    We establish a general relationship between the standard form of the individualistic social-welfare function and the ?reduced-form? version that is expressed in terms of inequality and mean income. This shows the relationship between the property of monotonicity and the slope of the equity-efficiency trade-off. Particularly simple results are available for a large class of inequality measures that includes the Gini. These results do not require differentiability of the social welfare function.Inequality, social welfare monotonicity

    To Be or not To Be Involved:A Questionnaire-Experimental View on Harsanyi’sUtilitarian Ethics

    Get PDF
    According to standard theory founded on Harsanyi (1953, 1955) a social welfarefunction can be appropriately based on the individual's approach to choice underuncertainty. We investigate whether people really do rank distributions according tothe same principles irrespective of whether the comparison involves money payoffs ina risky situation or the distribution of income among persons. We use a questionnaireexperiment to focus on the two different interpretations of the Harsanyi approach.There are important, systematic differences that transcend the cultural background ofrespondents.Impartial observer theorem, utilitarianism, welfare.

    Distributional Orderings: An Approach with Seven Flavours

    Get PDF
    We examine individuals' distributional orderings in a number of contexts. This is done by using a questionnaire-experiment that is presented to respondents in any one of seven "flavours" or interpretations of the basic distributional problem. The flavours include inequality, risk, social welfare and justice. The issue of personal involvement in the distributional comparison is explicitly addressed.social welfare, inequality, justice, risk, questionnaire experiments.

    Do we value mobility?

    Get PDF
    Is there a trade-off between people’s preference for income equality and income mobility? Testing for the existence of such a trade-off is difficult because mobility is a multifaceted concept. We analyse results from a questionnaire experiment based on simple precise concepts of income inequality and income mobility. We find no direct trade-off in preference between mobility and equality, but an indirect trade-off, applying when more income mobility can only be obtained at the expense of some income inequality. Mobility preference—but not equality preference—appears to be driven by personal experience of mobility

    Attitudes towards risk and inequality : a questionnaire-experimental approach

    Get PDF
    Orderings of income distribution in terms of inequality should be closely related to orderings in terms of risk. Using a novel mult-country questgionnaire experiment we examine the basis for this claim in terms of respondents' distributional perceptions. We show that in terms of both inequality and risk individuals consistently reject one of the standard axioms of distributional comparison. Moreover, there are significant differences in the 'maps' of inequality and risk comparisons. Rejection of the orthodox approach is less likely to occur when distributional comparisons involve extremes of the distributions.We show that certain key background variables are overwhelmingly important in predisposing individuals toward acceptance or rejection of the orthodox basis for distributional comparisons. This paper forms part of the research programme of the TMR network Living Standards, Inequality and Taxation [Contract No. ERBFMRXCT 980248] of the European Communities whose financial support is gratefully acknowledge
    corecore