Egalitarianism: Is Leximin the Only Option?
AbstractThe most influential egalitarian perspective is undoubtedly Rawls s (1971, 1993), which assigns absolute priority to the least advantaged in society (the difference principle). However, many have claimed that even though an egalitarian perspective should imply some priority to the worst off, the Rawlsian perspective is too demanding. One response to this criticism is to argue in favour of an egalitarian perspective that never assigns absolute priority to the worse off, but which still includes limited priority to those members of society in distributive conflicts. A different response to the demandingness criticism is to agree that the worse off should not always be given absolute priority, but to argue that there are some cases where they should be. In this paper, we elaborate on this view, and look at the possibility of deviating from the leximin approach within this category of egalitarian principles.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Cambridge University Press in its journal Economics and Philosophy.
Volume (Year): 16 (2000)
Issue (Month): 02 (October)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: The Edinburgh Building, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 2RU UK
Fax: +44 (0)1223 325150
Web page: http://journals.cambridge.org/jid_EAPProvider-Email:email@example.com
Other versions of this item:
- D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
- D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
- D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
- I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- LUTTENS, Roland Iwan & OOGHE, Erwin, 2006. "Is it fair to ‘make work pay’ ?," CORE Discussion Papers 2006026, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Michele Lombardi & Roberto Veneziani, 2009.
"Liberal Egalitarianism and the Harm Principle,"
Global COE Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series
gd09-078, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
- Michele Lombardi & Roberto Veneziani, 2009. "Liberal Egalitarianism and the Harm Principle," Working Papers 649, Queen Mary, University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
- Lombardi, Michele & Miyagishima, Kaname & Veneziani, Roberto, 2013. "Liberal Egalitarianism and the Harm Principle," MPRA Paper 48458, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Michele Lombardi & Kahame Miyagishima & Roberto Veneziani, 2013. "Liberal Egalitarianism and the Harm Principle," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2013-07, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
- Kristof Bosmans, 2007.
"Comparing degrees of inequality aversion,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 405-428, October.
- Kristof Bosmans, 2006. "Comparing degrees of inequality aversion," Public Economics Working Paper Series ineqav, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Working Group Public Economics.
- Kristof Bosmans, 2005. "Comparing degrees of inequality aversion," Center for Economic Studies - Discussion papers ces0517, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën.
- Roland Iwan Luttens & Erwin Ooghe, 2007.
"Is it Fair to 'Make Work Pay'?,"
London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(296), pages 599-626, November.
- Roland Iwan Luttens & Erwon Ooghe, 2004. "Is it fair to "make work pay"??," Center for Economic Studies - Discussion papers ces0410, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën.
- R. I. Luttens & E. Ooghe, 2005. "Is it fair to “make work pay”?," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 05/283, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
- Marc Fleurbaey, 2005.
"The Pazner-Schmeidler social ordering: A defense,"
Review of Economic Design,
Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 145-166, 04.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Keith Waters).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.