IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/106426.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Freedom in Games

Author

Listed:
  • Rommeswinkel, Hendrik

Abstract

Behind the veil of ignorance, a policy maker ranks combinations of game forms and information about how players interact within the game forms. The paper presents axioms on the preferences of the policy maker that are necessary and sufficient for the policy maker's preferences to be represented by the sum of an expected valuation and a freedom measure. The freedom measure is the mutual information between players' strategies and the players' outcomes of the game, capturing the degree to which players control their outcomes. The measure extends several measures from the opportunity set based freedom literature to situations where agents interact. This allows freedom to be measured in general economic models and thus derive policy recommendations based on the freedom instead of the welfare of agents. To illustrate the measure and axioms, applications to civil liberties and optimal taxation are provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Rommeswinkel, Hendrik, 2011. "Measuring Freedom in Games," MPRA Paper 106426, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 03 Mar 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:106426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/106426/1/MPRA_paper_106426.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Sugden, 2004. "The Opportunity Criterion: Consumer Sovereignty Without the Assumption of Coherent Preferences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1014-1033, September.
    2. Judd, Kenneth L., 1985. "The law of large numbers with a continuum of IID random variables," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 19-25, February.
    3. Elmes Susan & Reny Philip J., 1994. "On the Strategic Equivalence of Extensive Form Games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 1-23, February.
    4. Mailath, George J & Samuelson, Larry & Swinkels, Jeroen M, 1993. "Extensive Form Reasoning in Normal Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(2), pages 273-302, March.
    5. Ahlert, Marlies, 2010. "A new approach to procedural freedom in game forms," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 392-402, September.
    6. Anand, Paul & Pattanaik, Prasanta & Puppe, Clemens (ed.), 2009. "The Handbook of Rational and Social Choice," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199290420.
    7. Chew, Soo Hong & Sagi, Jacob S., 2008. "Small worlds: Modeling attitudes toward sources of uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 1-24, March.
    8. Vitorocco Peragine, 1999. "The Distribution and Redistribution of Opportunity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 37-70, February.
    9. Clemens Puppe & Yongsheng Xu, 2010. "Essential alternatives and freedom rankings," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(4), pages 669-685, October.
    10. Braham, Matthew, 2006. "Measuring Specific Freedom," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 317-333, November.
    11. Sebastiano Bavetta & Vitorocco Peragine, 2006. "Measuring autonomy freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(1), pages 31-45, January.
    12. Pattanaik, Prasanta K., 1994. "Rights and freedom in welfare economics," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 731-738, April.
    13. Patrick Suppes, 1996. "The nature and measurement of freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 13(2), pages 183-200, April.
    14. Bezalel Peleg, 1997. "Effectivity functions, game forms, games, and rights," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15(1), pages 67-80.
    15. 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).
    16. Martin Van Hees & Marcel Wissenburg, 1999. "Freedom and Opportunity," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 47(1), pages 67-82, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Martin van Hees, 2004. "Freedom of choice and diversity of options: Some difficulties," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 253-266, February.
    19. Eckehard F. Rosenbaum, 2000. "On Measuring Freedom," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 205-227, April.
    20. Ian Carter, 2004. "Choice, freedom, and freedom of choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 61-81, February.
    21. W. M. Gorman, 1968. "The Structure of Utility Functions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(4), pages 367-390.
    22. Sebastiano Bavetta, 2004. "Measuring freedom of choice: An alternative view of a recent literature," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 29-48, February.
    23. Matthew Ryan, 2016. "Essentiality and convexity in the ranking of opportunity sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 853-877, December.
    24. Johan Gustafsson, 2010. "Freedom of choice and expected compromise," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(1), pages 65-79, June.
    25. Prasanta Pattanaik & Yongsheng Xu, 1998. "On Preference and Freedom," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 173-198, April.
    26. Matthew Ryan, 2016. "Essentiality and Convexity in the Ranking of Opportunity Sets," Working Papers 2016-01, Auckland University of Technology, Department of Economics.
    27. Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-577, May.
    28. Marlies Ahlert, 2008. "Guarantees in Game Forms," Springer Books, in: Matthew Braham & Frank Steffen (ed.), Power, Freedom, and Voting, chapter 17, pages 325-341, Springer.
    29. Serge-Christophe Kolm, 2010. "On real economic freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(3), pages 351-375, September.
    30. Sebastian Bervoets, 2007. "Freedom of choice in a social context: comparing game forms," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(2), pages 295-315, September.
    31. 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.
    32. 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.
    33. Sen, Amartya, 1988. "Freedom of choice : Concept and content," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(2-3), pages 269-294, March.
    34. Walter Bossert, 1998. "Opportunity Sets and the Measurement of Information," Discussion Papers 98/6, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
    35. Giraud, Gael, 2003. "Strategic market games: an introduction," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(5-6), pages 355-375, July.
    36. Robert Sugden, 2007. "The value of opportunities over time when preferences are unstable," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(4), pages 665-682, December.
    37. Itai Sher, 2018. "Evaluating Allocations of Freedom," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(612), pages 65-94, July.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Sebastian Bervoets, 2007. "Freedom of choice in a social context: comparing game forms," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(2), pages 295-315, September.
    6. Prasanta K. Pattanaik, 2018. "Individual Freedom and Welfare Economics," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 16(1), pages 1-12, March.
    7. James E. Foster, 2010. "Freedom, Opportunity and Wellbeing," Working Papers 2010-15, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
    8. Martin Hees, 2010. "The specific value of freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(4), pages 687-703, October.
    9. Serge-Christophe Kolm, 2003. "Macrojustice : distribution, impôts et transferts optimaux," IDEP Working Papers 0305, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France.
    10. Bervoets, Sebastian & Gravel, Nicolas, 2007. "Appraising diversity with an ordinal notion of similarity: An axiomatic approach," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 259-273, May.
    11. Gaetano Gaballo & Ernesto Savaglio, 2012. "On Revealed Diversity," Department of Economics University of Siena 635, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    12. 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.
    13. Gekker, Ruvin & van Hees, Martin, 2006. "Freedom, opportunity and uncertainty: A logical approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 246-263, September.
    14. Bossert, Walter, 2000. "Opportunity sets and uncertain consequences1," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 475-496, May.
    15. Keith Dowding, 2011. "Republican freedom, rights, and the coalition problem," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 10(3), pages 301-322, August.
    16. Ernesto Screpanti, 2006. "Taxation, Social Goods And The Distribution Of Freedom," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 1-12, February.
    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. Tadenuma, Koichi & Xu, Yongsheng, 2012. "Extensions of the Fundamental Welfare Theorems in a Non-welfaristic Framework," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 53(1), pages 107-120, June.
    19. Agee, Mark D. & Crocker, Thomas D., 2013. "Operationalizing the capability approach to assessing well-being," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 80-86.
    20. V. Danilov & G. Koshevoy & E. Savaglio, 2015. "Hyper-relations, choice functions, and orderings of opportunity sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(1), pages 51-69, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Freedom of Choice; Mutual Information; Entropy; Measurement; Game Form; Process; Income Taxation; Civil Liberties;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • 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
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:pra:mprapa:106426. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.