IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rmm/journl/v4y2013i65.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fairness That Money Can Buy. Procedural Egalitarianism in Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Werner Gueth

    () (Max Planck Institute of Economics, Jena)

  • Hartmut Kliemt

    () (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management)

Abstract

Contrary to communitarian market criticism institutions relying on money and bidding can strengthen faculties of ‘self-governance’. Securing procedurally egalitarian bidding on the basis of declared monetary evaluations guarantees that all realized changes of a status quo are in an ‘objective’ (pecuniary) sense equally advantageous for all members of the community. We show how to use this idea in the context of Elinor Ostrom type common(s) projects. Empirical evidence on ‘procedurally fair bidding’ is presented. The practical scope and limits of procedural egalitarianism need further empirical exploration but money may be the best means to express moral values in ‘communitarian consent’.

Suggested Citation

  • Werner Gueth & Hartmut Kliemt, 2013. "Fairness That Money Can Buy. Procedural Egalitarianism in Practice," Rationality, Markets and Morals, Frankfurt School Verlag, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, vol. 4(65), May.
  • Handle: RePEc:rmm:journl:v:4:y:2013:i:65
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rmm-journal.de/downloads/Article_Gueth_Kliemt.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Werner Güth & Anastasios Koukoumelis & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2012. "Public projects benefiting some and harming others: three experimental studies," Jena Economic Research Papers 2012-034, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    2. Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753, May.
    3. Kliemt, Hartmut, 1994. "The Calculus of Consent after Thirty Years," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 79(3-4), pages 341-353, June.
    4. Satz, Debra, 2010. "Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale: The Moral Limits of Markets," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195311594.
    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. Güth, Werner, 2014. "Endogenous community formation and collective provision – A procedurally fair mechanism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 389-395.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Fair Procedures; Governing the Commons; Communitarianism; Contractarianism; Egalitarian Mechanisms; Unanimity; ‘Crowding out’;

    JEL classification:

    • H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods
    • H61 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt - - - Budget; Budget Systems
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • 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

    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:rmm:journl:v:4:y:2013:i:65. 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: (Friederike Pförtner). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/hfbfide.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.