IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v44y2011i3p231-248.html

Inequity in the distribution of science and technology outcomes: a conceptual model

Author

Listed:
  • Barry Bozeman

  • Catherine Slade
  • Paul Hirsch

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Barry Bozeman & Catherine Slade & Paul Hirsch, 2011. "Inequity in the distribution of science and technology outcomes: a conceptual model," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(3), pages 231-248, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:44:y:2011:i:3:p:231-248
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-011-9132-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11077-011-9132-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-011-9132-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chris Caswill & Elizabeth Shove, 2000. "Introducing interactive social science," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 154-157, June.
    2. Kenneth Goldin, 1977. "Equal access vs. Selective access: A critique of public goods theory," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 53-71, March.
    3. Goldstein, Joshua S., 1985. "Basic human needs: The plateau curve," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 595-609, May.
    4. Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos, 2005. "Fairness and Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 960-980, September.
    5. James Konow, 2003. "Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(4), pages 1188-1239, December.
    6. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1971. "A Utilitarian Approach to the Concept of Equality in Public Expenditures," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 85(3), pages 409-415.
    7. Sen, Amartya, 1973. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198281931.
    8. Dilip Mookherjee & Debraj Ray, 2003. "Persistent Inequality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(2), pages 369-393.
    9. Elisha A. Pazner & David Schmeidler, 1978. "Egalitarian Equivalent Allocations: A New Concept of Economic Equity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 92(4), pages 671-687.
    10. Edward Woodhouse & Daniel Sarewitz, 2007. "Science policies for reducing societal inequities," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 139-150, March.
    11. Nelson, Richard R., 2003. "On the uneven evolution of human know-how," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 909-922, June.
    12. Susan E Cozzens, 2007. "Distributive justice in science and technology policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 85-94, March.
    13. Mueller, Dennis C, 1976. "Public Choice: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 395-433, June.
    14. Watson, Robert & Crawford, Michael & Farley, Sara, 2003. "Strategic approaches to science and technology in development," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3026, The World Bank.
    15. Nelson, Richard R, 1981. "Research on Productivity Growth and Productivity Differences: Dead Ends and New Departures," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 19(3), pages 1029-1064, September.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Niinikoski, Marja-Liisa & Moisander, Johanna, 2014. "Serial and comparative analysis of innovation policy change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 69-80.

    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. John E. Roemer & Alain Trannoy, 2013. "Equality of Opportunity," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1921, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    2. Siddig Abdulmageed Salih, 2011. "Comprehensive Human Development: Realities and Aspirations," Islamic Economic Studies, The Islamic Research and Training Institute (IRTI), vol. 19, pages 19-49.
    3. Sophie Cetre & Max Lobeck & Claudia Senik & Thierry Verdier, 2018. "In search of unanimously preferred income distributions. Evidence from a choice experiment," Working Papers halshs-01863359, HAL.
    4. Paetzel, Fabian & Sausgruber, Rupert, 2018. "Cognitive ability and in-group bias: An experimental study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 280-292.
    5. Corneo, Giacomo & Fong, Christina M., 2008. "What's the monetary value of distributive justice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 289-308, February.
    6. Bortolotti, Stefania & Soraperra, Ivan & Sutter, Matthias, 2025. "Social Risk, Fairness Types, and Redistribution," IZA Discussion Papers 18122, IZA Network @ LISER.
    7. repec:hal:pseose:hal-01095463 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Martin, Ben R. & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2025. "Richard R Nelson (1930–2025): Evolutionary economist and innovation scholar," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(4).
    9. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    10. Leroux, Marie-Louise & Ponthiere, Gregory, 2013. "Utilitarianism and unequal longevities: A remedy?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 888-899.
    11. Erwin OOGHE & Andreas PEICHL, 2010. "Fair and efficient taxation under partial control: theory and evidence," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces10.32, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    12. Joao Pereira, 1989. "What does equity in health mean?," Working Papers 061chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    13. Bosmans, Kristof & Decancq, Koen & Ooghe, Erwin, 2018. "Who's afraid of aggregating money metrics?," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    14. Ponthiere, Gregory, 2016. "Pollution, unequal lifetimes and fairness," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 49-64.
    15. Kuhn, Andreas, 2009. "In the Eye of the Beholder: Subjective Inequality Measures and the Demand for Redistribution," IZA Discussion Papers 4360, IZA Network @ LISER.
    16. Niehues, Judith & Peichl, Andreas, 2011. "Lower and Upper Bounds of Unfair Inequality: Theory and Evidence for Germany and the US," IZA Discussion Papers 5834, IZA Network @ LISER.
    17. Ray, Debraj, 2007. "Introduction to development theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 1-10, November.
    18. James Konow & Tatsuyoshi Saijo & Kenju Akai, 2008. "Morals and Mores? Experimental Evidence on Equity and Equality from the US and Japan," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000002055, David K. Levine.
    19. Theo Papaioannou, 2011. "Technological innovation, global justice and politics of development," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 11(4), pages 321-338, July.
    20. Richard Cookson & Shehzad Ali & Aki Tsuchiya & Miqdad Asaria, 2018. "E‐learning and health inequality aversion: A questionnaire experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(11), pages 1754-1771, November.
    21. Hennighausen, Tanja & Heinemann, Friedrich & Bischoff, Ivo, 2008. "Individual Determinants of Social Fairness Assessments: The Case of Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-063, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:kap:policy:v:44:y:2011:i:3:p:231-248. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.