IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v47y2014i2p605-633.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social evaluations when populations differ in size

Author

Listed:
  • Jean‐Yves Duclos
  • Agnès Zabsonré

Abstract

Assessments of “social welfare” do not usually take into account population sizes. This can lead to serious social evaluation flaws, particularly in contexts in which policies can affect demographic growth. We develop in this paper a little‐known though ethically attractive approach to correcting the flaws of traditional social evaluations, an approach that is sensitive to population sizes and that is based on critical‐level generalized utilitarianism (CLGU). Traditional CLGU is extended by considering arbitrary orders of welfare dominance and ranges of “poverty lines,” as well as values for the “critical level” of how much a life must be minimally worth to contribute to social welfare. We apply these social evaluation methods to rank Canada across 1976, 1986, 1996 and 2006 and to estimate normatively and statistically robust lower and upper bounds of critical levels over which these rankings can be made. Évaluations sociales quand les populations diffèrent par la taille. Les évaluations du bien‐être social ne tiennent pas compte habituellement de la taille des populations. Cela entraîne des failles sérieuses dans les évaluations sociales, particulièrement dans des contextes où les politiques peuvent affecter la croissance démographique. Ce texte utilise une approche peu connue mais attrayante sur le plan éthique pour corriger les failles dans les évaluations traditionnelles. Il s'agit d'une approche sensible à la taille de la population et qui est basée sur l'utilitarisme généralisé de niveau critique (UGNC). Cette approche est généralisée en considérant des ordres arbitraires de dominance de bien‐être et des intervalles de lignes de pauvreté, ainsi que des valeurs pour le ‘niveau critique’ à savoir combien une vie doit valoir pour contribuer au bien‐être social. On applique ces méthodes d’évaluation pour comparer et classer les distributions du Canada de 1976, 1986, 1996, et 2006, et pour estimer normativement et statistiquement des bornes inférieures et supérieures robustes des niveaux critiques pour lesquels ces classements peuvent être faits.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean‐Yves Duclos & Agnès Zabsonré, 2014. "Social evaluations when populations differ in size," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(2), pages 605-633, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:47:y:2014:i:2:p:605-633
    DOI: 10.1111/caje.12085
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12085
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/caje.12085?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blackorby,Charles & Bossert,Walter & Donaldson,David J., 2005. "Population Issues in Social Choice Theory, Welfare Economics, and Ethics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521532587.
    2. John COCKBURN & Jean-Yves DUCLOS & Agnès ZABSONRÉ, 2011. "Is the value of humanity increasing? A critical-level enquiry," Working Papers I13, FERDI.
    3. Wen‐Hao Chen & Jean‐Yves Duclos, 2011. "Testing for poverty dominance: an application to Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(3), pages 781-803, August.
    4. Anthony F. Shorrocks & James E. Foster, 1987. "Transfer Sensitive Inequality Measures," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(3), pages 485-497.
    5. Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 2000. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1435-1464, November.
    6. Diganta Mukherjee, 2008. "Poverty measures incorporating variable rate of alleviation due to population growth," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(1), pages 97-107, June.
    7. Ronny Aboudi & Dominique Thon & Stein Wallace, 2010. "Inequality comparisons when the populations differ in size," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 8(1), pages 47-70, March.
    8. Kaur, Amarjot & Prakasa Rao, B.L.S. & Singh, Harshinder, 1994. "Testing for Second-Order Stochastic Dominance of Two Distributions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(5), pages 849-866, December.
    9. Blackorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1984. "Social criteria for evaluating population change," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1-2), pages 13-33, November.
    10. Blakorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1980. "Ethical Indices for the Measurement of Poverty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 1053-1060, May.
    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. Lars Osberg, 2015. "Book Review of Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 13(3), pages 479-484, September.

    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. Cockburn, John & Duclos, Jean-Yves & Zabsonré, Agnès, 2014. "Is global social welfare increasing? A critical-level enquiry," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 151-162.
    2. John COCKBURN & Jean-Yves DUCLOS & Agnès ZABSONRÉ, 2011. "Is the value of humanity increasing? A critical-level enquiry," Working Papers I13, FERDI.
    3. Oliver Linton & Esfandiar Maasoumi & Yoon-Jae Wang, 2002. "Consistent testing for stochastic dominance: a subsampling approach," CeMMAP working papers 03/02, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    4. Maasoumi, Esfandiar & Almas Heshmati, 2003. "Evaluating Dominance Ranking of PSID Incomes by various Household Attributes," Departmental Working Papers 0509, Southern Methodist University, Department of Economics.
    5. Branko Milanovic & Mauricio Apablaza & Florent Bresson & Gaston Yalonetzky, 2016. "When More Does Not Necessarily Mean Better: Health-Related Illfare Comparisons with Non-Monotone Well-Being Relationships," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 62, pages 145-178, August.
    6. Jean-Yves Duclos & Paul Makdissi, 2007. "Restricted Inequality and Relative Poverty," Research on Economic Inequality, in: Inequality and Poverty, pages 255-280, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    7. Claudio Zoli, 2009. "Variable population welfare and poverty orderings satisfying replication properties," Working Papers 69/2009, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    8. Hsu, Justine & Majdzadeh, Reza & Mills, Anne & Hanson, Kara, 2021. "A dominance approach to analyze the incidence of catastrophic health expenditures in Iran," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    9. Russell Davidson, 2010. "Innis Lecture: Inference on income distributions," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1122-1148, November.
    10. Almas Heshmati & Robert Rudolf, 2014. "Income versus Consumption Inequality in Korea: Evaluating Stochastic Dominance Rankings by Various Household Attributes," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 28(4), pages 413-436, December.
    11. Tahsin Mehdi, 2020. "Testing for Stochastic Dominance up to a Common Relative Poverty Line," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, February.
    12. Walter Bossert & Susumu Cato & Kohei Kamaga, 2022. "Generalized Poverty-gap Orderings," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 189-215, November.
    13. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    14. Härdle, Wolfgang Karl & Schulz, Rainer & Xie, Taojun, 2019. "Cooling Measures and Housing Wealth: Evidence from Singapore," IRTG 1792 Discussion Papers 2019-001, Humboldt University of Berlin, International Research Training Group 1792 "High Dimensional Nonstationary Time Series".
    15. Jesus Gonzalo & Jose Olmo, 2014. "Conditional Stochastic Dominance Tests In Dynamic Settings," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55(3), pages 819-838, August.
    16. Duclos, Jean-Yves & Sahn, David & Younger, Stephen D., 2003. "Polarization: Robust Multidimensional Poverty Comparisons," Cahiers de recherche 0304, CIRPEE.
    17. Duclos, Jean-Yves & Araar, Abdelkrim & Giles, John, 2010. "Chronic and transient poverty: Measurement and estimation, with evidence from China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 266-277, March.
    18. Stelter, Robert, 2014. "Over-aging: Are present human populations too old?," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 137, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    19. , B. & ,, 2014. "Escaping the repugnant conclusion: rank-discounted utilitarianism with variable population," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.
    20. Roxana Chiriac & Valeri Voev, 2011. "Modelling and forecasting multivariate realized volatility," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(6), pages 922-947, September.

    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:wly:canjec:v:47:y:2014:i:2:p:605-633. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    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.