IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hit/hituec/728.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trial to count the discounted envy; Evaluation and Compensation

Author

Listed:
  • Hobara, Nobuhiro

Abstract

No envy or envy is the important object or problem the social choice researcher often study and many researcher try to decrease the envy existed in economy while keeping in mind the problem of social welfare. Feldman and Kirman(1974) try to count the number of envy of each subject or in economy directly . Their method is tractable in term of evaluating the degree of fairness and comparing the degree of fairness or envy among economies. But we consider that their method has serious problem. In short, they treat the envy of the richest subject equally with that of the poorest subject. So, we try to modify Feldman and Kirman (1974) from the point of justice and we introduce such a discounted envy that we discount envy each subject feel by the envy felt by the other subject, and we reconsider the problem of evaluation and compensation.

Suggested Citation

  • Hobara, Nobuhiro, 2021. "Trial to count the discounted envy; Evaluation and Compensation," Discussion Paper Series 728, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    • Handle: RePEc:hit:hituec:728
    Note: December 7, 2021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/72522/DP728.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel, Terrence E., 1975. "A revised concept of distributional equity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 94-109, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kranich, Laurence, 1995. "Equity and economic theory: reflections on methodology and scope," UC3M Working papers. Economics 3919, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    2. Marc Fleurbaey, 2006. "To Envy or to be Envied? Refinements of No-Envy fot the Compensation Problem," IDEP Working Papers 0603, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France, revised Jul 2006.
    3. Terry E. Daniel & James E. Parco, 2005. "Fair, Efficient and Envy-Free Bargaining: An Experimental Test of the Brams-Taylor Adjusted Winner Mechanism," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 241-264, May.
    4. Cato, Susumu, 2010. "Local strict envy-freeness in large economies," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 319-322, May.
    5. Elisha A. Pazner, 1976. "Reviews: Recent Thinking on Economic Justice," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 2(1), pages 143-169, February.
    6. Elisha A. Pazner, 1975. "Pitfalls in the Theory of Fairness," Discussion Papers 181, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    7. Corchon, Luis C. & Iturbe-Ormaetxe, Inigo, 2001. "A Proposal to Unify Some Concepts in the Theory of Fairness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 540-571, December.
    8. Waitzberg, Ruth & Schmidt, Andrea E. & Blümel, Miriam & Penneau, Anne & Farmakas, Antonis & Ljungvall, Åsa & Barbabella, Francesco & Augusto, Gonçalo Figueiredo & Marchildon, Gregory P. & Saunes, Ingr, 2020. "Mapping variability in allocation of Long-Term Care funds across payer agencies in OECD countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(5), pages 491-500.
    9. Thomson, William, 2011. "Chapter Twenty-One - Fair Allocation Rules," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 21, pages 393-506, Elsevier.
    10. Maître Philippe, 1999. "La Notion D'equite : Une Revue," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    envy(no-envy) fairness; extended utility function; distribution; evaluation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H89 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - Other
    • I30 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General
    • D39 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Other
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hit:hituec:728. 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: Hiromichi Miyake (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iehitjp.html .

    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.