IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jecinq/v2y2005i2p105-116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ranking opportunity sets in the space of functionings

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Farina
  • Eugenio Peluso
  • Ernesto Savaglio

Abstract

We develop a ranking of compact, convex and comprehensive opportunity sets defined in the evaluative space of individual functionings. We suppose the existence of a target, that is a multidimensional bliss point in terms of functionings. This leads us to define concepts such as essentiality and freedom in a novel way. As a main result, we give an axiomatic characterization of the ranking obtained by minimizing the Euclidean distance between each opportunity set and the target. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2005

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Farina & Eugenio Peluso & Ernesto Savaglio, 2005. "Ranking opportunity sets in the space of functionings," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 2(2), pages 105-116, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jecinq:v:2:y:2005:i:2:p:105-116
    DOI: 10.1007/s10888-005-4385-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10888-005-4385-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10888-005-4385-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rubinstein, Ariel & Zhou, Lin, 1999. "Choice problems with a 'reference' point," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 205-209, May.
    2. Yongsheng Xu, 2004. "On ranking linear budget sets in terms of freedom of choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 281-289, February.
    3. Sen, Amartya, 1997. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198292975.
    4. Puppe, Clemens, 1996. "An Axiomatic Approach to "Preference for Freedom of Choice"," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 174-199, January.
    5. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Markets and Freedoms: Achievements and Limitations of the Market Mechanism in Promoting Individual Freedoms," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 519-541, October.
    6. Prasanta K. PATTANAIK & Yongsheng XU, 1990. "On Ranking Opportunity Sets in Terms of Freedom of Choice," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1990036, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rebeca Echávarri & Iñaki Permanyer, 2008. "Ranking profiles of capability sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(3), pages 521-535, October.
    2. Martin Binder & Tom Broekel, 2011. "Applying a Non-parametric Efficiency Analysis to Measure Conversion Efficiency in Great Britain," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 257-281.
    3. William Horrace & Joseph Marchand & Timothy Smeeding, 2008. "Ranking inequality: Applications of multivariate subset selection," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 6(1), pages 5-32, March.
    4. Martin Binder & Tom Broekel, 2012. "Happiness No Matter the Cost? An Examination on How Efficiently Individuals Reach Their Happiness Levels," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 621-645, August.
    5. Binder, Martin & Broekel, Tom, 2008. "Conversion Efficiency as a Complementing Measure of Welfare in Capability Space," MPRA Paper 7583, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Koichi Tadenuma & Yongsheng Xu, 2017. "Distributions of the budget sets: an axiomatic analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 221-237, January.
    2. Ballester, Miguel A. & De Miguel, Juan R., 2006. "On freedom of choice and infinite sets: The Suprafinite Rule," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 291-300, June.
    3. Sebastiano Bavetta & Marco Del Seta, 2001. "Constraints and the Measurement of Freedom of Choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 213-238, May.
    4. Wulf Gaertner & Yongsheng Xu, 2011. "Reference-dependent rankings of sets in characteristics space," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 717-728, October.
    5. Ronen Shnayderman, 2016. "Ian Carter’s non-evaluative theory of freedom and diversity: a critique," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 39-55, January.
    6. Sebastian Silva-Leander, 2011. "On the Possibility of Measuring Freedom: A Kantian Perspective," OPHI Working Papers 49, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    7. Ballester, Miguel A. & de Miguel, Juan R. & Nieto, Jorge, 2004. "Set comparisons in a general domain: the Indirect Utility Criterion," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 139-150, September.
    8. Suzumura, Kotaro & Xu, Yongsheng, 2001. "Characterizations of Consequentialism and Nonconsequentialism," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 423-436, December.
    9. Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    10. Reiko Gotoh & Naoki Yoshihara, 2018. "Securing basic well-being for all," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(4), pages 422-452, October.
    11. Vizard, Polly, 2005. "The contributions of Professor Amartya Sen in the field of human rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6273, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Ernesto Screpanti, 2006. "Taxation, Social Goods And The Distribution Of Freedom," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 1-12, February.
    13. Antoinette Baujard, 2006. "Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200611, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    14. Amartya K. Sen, 1997. "From Income Inequality to Economic Inequality," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 384-401, October.
    15. Martin van Hees, 1998. "On the Analysis of Negative Freedom," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 175-197, October.
    16. Jimena Galindo & Levent Ülkü, 2020. "Diversity relations over menus," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(2), pages 229-242, August.
    17. Baharad, Eyal & Nitzan, Shmuel, 2003. "Essential alternatives and set-dependent preferences--an axiomatic approach," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 121-129, April.
    18. Antonio Romero-Medina, 2001. "More on preference and freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(1), pages 179-191.
    19. José Alcantud & Ritxar Arlegi, 2008. "Ranking sets additively in decisional contexts: an axiomatic characterization," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 147-171, March.
    20. Yongsheng Xu & Naoki Yoshihara, 2022. "Bargaining theory over opportunity assignments and the egalitarian solution," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 198-219, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jecinq:v:2:y:2005:i:2:p:105-116. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.