IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/ecnphi/v36y2020i3p407-434_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The normative gap: mechanism design and ideal theories of justice

Author

Listed:
  • Hitzig, Zoë

Abstract

This paper investigates the relationship between economic theory and theories of justice in the design of public policy. In particular, it focuses on the role of mechanism design in policy contexts beset with issues of social, racial and distributive justice. Economists’ involvement in redesigning Boston’s algorithm for allocating K-12 students to public schools serves as an instructive case study. The paper draws on the distinction between ideal theory and non-ideal theory in political philosophy and the concept of performativity in economic sociology to argue that mechanism design can enact elaborate ideal theories of justice. A normative gap thus emerges between the goals of the policymakers and the objectives of economic designs. As a result, mechanism design may obstruct stakeholders’ avenues for normative criticism of public policies, and serve as a technology of depoliticization.

Suggested Citation

  • Hitzig, Zoë, 2020. "The normative gap: mechanism design and ideal theories of justice," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 407-434, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:ecnphi:v:36:y:2020:i:3:p:407-434_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266267119000270/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tayfun Sonmez, 2023. "Minimalist Market Design: A Framework for Economists with Policy Aspirations," Papers 2401.00307, arXiv.org.
    2. Tayfun Sonmez & Utku Unver, 2022. "Market Design for Social Justice: A Case Study on a Constitutional Crisis in India," Papers 2210.10166, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2022.
    3. Rilinger, Georg, 2021. "The organizational roots of market design failure structural abstraction, the limits of hierarchy, and the California energy crisis of 2000/01," MPIfG Discussion Paper 21/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    4. Kyle Greenberg & Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2021. "Redesigning the US Army’s Branching Process: A Case Study in Minimalist Market Design," NBER Working Papers 28911, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. van Basshuysen, Philippe, 2023. "Markets, market algorithms, and algorithmic bias," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115694, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver, 2022. "How (not) to reform India's affirmative action policies for its economically weaker segments," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 1054, Boston College Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    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:cup:ecnphi:v:36:y:2020:i:3:p:407-434_6. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/eap .

    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.