Fairness in Public Good Provision: An Investigation of Preferences for Equality and Proportionality
A binary public good voting mechanism is designed to test for preferences for income equality and cost/benefit proportionality. The voting design isolates preferences for equality from those for proportionality and controls for alternative external preferences such as altruism, envy, and the Rawlsian Difference Principle. Individuals choose between greater income or fairness in these demand-revealing votes. Treatments vary whether the positions of voters are earned or random, whether votes are hypothetical or real, and whether they are over gains or losses. Significant deviations from self-interested voting are observed in all treatments testing for equality and in some treatments testing for proportionality.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 31 (1998)
Issue (Month): 3 (August)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://economics.ca/cje/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: http://economics.ca/en/membership.php Email: |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:31:y:1998:i:3:p:708-729. 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: (Prof. Werner Antweiler)
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.