Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Sequential dominance and weighted utilitarianism

Contents:

Author Info

  • Erwin Ooghe

Abstract

Ok and Lambert (1999) show that one does not have to be a utilitarian to accept Atkinson and Bourguignon’s (1987) sequential generalized Lorenz dominance criterion, because the latter is also supported by a much wider class of aggregation functions. We take a minimal stance, we show that it suffices to be a weighted utilitarian –with higher weights for the more needy– to accept it. We also discuss some possible extensions.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/eng/ew/discussionpapers/Dps05/Dps0518.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën in its series Center for Economic Studies - Discussion papers with number ces0518.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Mar 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ete:ceswps:ces0518

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Naamsestraat 69, 3000 Leuven
Phone: +32-(0)16-32 67 25
Fax: +32-(0)16-32 67 96
Email:
Web page: http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/ew
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Shorrocks, Anthony, 2004. "Inequality and Welfare Evaluation of Heterogeneous Income Distributions," Working Paper Series UNU-WIDER Research Paper , World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
  2. Atkinson, A B, 1992. "Measuring Poverty and Differences in Family Composition," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 59(233), pages 1-16, February.
  3. Patrick Moyes, 1999. "Comparaisons de distributions hétérogènes et critères de dominance," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 138(2), pages 125-146.
  4. Peter J. Lambert & Xavier Ramos, 2001. "Welfare comparisons: sequential procedures for heterogenous populations," Working Papers wp0114, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
  5. Ebert, Udo, 1997. "Social Welfare When Needs Differ: An Axiomatic Approach," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(254), pages 233-44, May.
  6. Ok, Efe A. & Lambert, Peter J., 1999. "On evaluating social welfare by sequential generalized Lorenz dominance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 45-53, April.
  7. Anthony Shorrocks, 2004. "Inequality and welfare evaluation of heterogeneous income distributions," Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 193-218, July.
  8. Capeau, Bart & Ooghe, Erwin, 2007. "On comparing heterogeneous populations: Is there really a conflict between welfarism and a concern for greater equality in living standards?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-28, January.
  9. Chambaz, Christine & Maurin, Eric, 1998. "Atkinson and Bourguignon's Dominance Criteria: Extended and Applied to the Measurement of Poverty in France," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 44(4), pages 497-513, December.
  10. Bourguignon, Francois, 1989. "Family size and social utility : Income distribution dominance criteria," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 67-80, September.
  11. Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
  12. Udo Ebert & Patrick Moyes, 2003. "Equivalence Scales Reconsidered," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 319-343, January.
  13. Jenkins, Stephen P & Lambert, Peter J, 1993. "Ranking Income Distributions When Needs Differ," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 39(4), pages 337-56, December.
  14. Ebert, Udo, 2000. "Sequential Generalized Lorenz Dominance and Transfer Principles," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 113-22, April.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Udo Ebert, 2010. "Dominance criteria for welfare comparisons: using equivalent income to describe differences in needs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 55-67, July.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ete:ceswps:ces0518. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Karla Vander Weyden).

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.