IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/sticas/-220.html

When and why might choice in public services have intrinsic (dis)value?

Author

Listed:
  • Aveek Bhattacharya

Abstract

Governments in several countries have sought to increase choice in public services. Proponents claim the value of such choice is both instrumental (it improves outcomes) and intrinsic (choice is valuable in itself). Yet while the instrumental benefits of such measures are strongly contested, the supposed intrinsic value of public service choice is both normatively and empirically underexplored. This paper draws on the philosophical and psychological literature on the costs and benefits of choice to identify why and under what circumstances choice in public services might have intrinsic value (or indeed, disvalue). Through this process, it develop a framework of empirical questions that can be used to analyse the intrinsic (dis)value of particular choice reforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Aveek Bhattacharya, 2020. "When and why might choice in public services have intrinsic (dis)value?," CASE Papers /220, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:cep:sticas:/220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cp/casepaper220.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Conly, Sarah, 2017. "Paternalism, coercion and the unimportance of (some) liberties," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 207-218, November.
    2. Ian Carter, 2004. "Choice, freedom, and freedom of choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 61-81, February.
    3. Dowding, Keith, 1992. "Choice: Its Increase and its Value," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 301-314, July.
    4. Sebastiano Bavetta & Francesco Guala, 2003. "Autonomy-Freedom and Deliberation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 423-443, October.
    5. Prasanta K. PATTANAIK & Yongsheng XU, 1990. "On Ranking Opportunity Sets in Terms of Freedom of Choice," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1990036, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    6. Sen, Amartya, 1991. "Welfare, preference and freedom," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 15-29, October.
    7. Pauline Musset, 2012. "School Choice and Equity: Current Policies in OECD Countries and a Literature Review," OECD Education Working Papers 66, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bhattacharya, Aveek, 2020. "When and why might choice in public services have intrinsic (dis)value?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121526, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Antoinette Baujard, 2006. "Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 200611, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    3. Ronen Shnayderman, 2016. "Ian Carter’s non-evaluative theory of freedom and diversity: a critique," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 39-55, January.
    4. Ballester, Miguel A. & de Miguel, Juan R. & Nieto, Jorge, 2004. "Set comparisons in a general domain: the Indirect Utility Criterion," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 139-150, September.
    5. Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    6. Gekker, Ruvin & Piggins, Ashley, 2009. "Evaluating Opportunities When People are Uncertainty Averse," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 40(1), pages 109-116.
    7. Marini, Annalisa, 2016. "Cultural Beliefs, Values and Economics: A Survey," MPRA Paper 69747, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. repec:qeh:ophiwp:ophiwp035 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Clemens Puppe & Yongsheng Xu, 2010. "Essential alternatives and freedom rankings," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(4), pages 669-685, October.
    10. Amartya K. Sen, 1997. "From Income Inequality to Economic Inequality," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 384-401, October.
    11. Rommeswinkel, Hendrik, 2011. "Measuring Freedom in Games," MPRA Paper 106426, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 03 Mar 2021.
    12. Martin van Hees, 1998. "On the Analysis of Negative Freedom," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 175-197, October.
    13. Martin Van Hees, 2003. "Acting Autonomously Versus not Acting Heteronomously," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 337-355, June.
    14. Jorge Alcalde-Unzu & Miguel Ballester & Jorge Nieto, 2012. "Freedom of choice: John Stuart Mill and the tree of life," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 209-226, March.
    15. Walter Bossert & Prasanta K. Pattanaik & Yongsheng Xu, 2003. "Similarity of Options and the Measurement of Diversity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 405-421, October.
    16. Sebastiano Bavetta & Vitorocco Peragine, 2006. "Measuring autonomy freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(1), pages 31-45, January.
    17. Pattanaik, Prasanta K. & Xu, Yongsheng, 2000. "On diversity and freedom of choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 123-130, September.
    18. Ok, Efe A., 1997. "On Opportunity Inequality Measurement," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 300-329, December.
    19. Iwata, Yukinori, 2007. "A variant of non-consequentialism and its characterization," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 284-295, May.
    20. Jérôme Wittwer, 1993. "La liberté de choix dans l'espace temps revenu : un essai de quantification," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 110(4), pages 199-200.
    21. Martin Hees, 2010. "The specific value of freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(4), pages 687-703, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • I0 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - General
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cep:sticas:/220. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/case/_new/publications/ .

    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.