IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cesptp/halshs-00344468.html

Shared destinies and the measurement of social risk equity

Author

Listed:
  • Thibault Gajdos

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • John Weymark

    (Vanderbilt University [Nashville])

  • Claudio Zoli

    (UNIVR - Università degli studi di Verona = University of Verona)

Abstract

The evaluation of social risk equity for alternative probability distributions over the potential sets of fatalities is analyzed axiomatically. Fishburn and Straffin [Equity considerations in public risks valuation, Operatons Research 37 (1999), 229-239] have identified a necessary and sufficient condition for two social risk distributions to be judged to be socially indifferent whenever their associated distributions of risk of death for individuals and for the number of fatalities are the same. It is argued that this approach does not permit society to exhibit any concern for the number of people an individual perishes with. A weakening of the Fishburn-Straffin condition that is compatible with a concern for shared destinies is proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Thibault Gajdos & John Weymark & Claudio Zoli, 2008. "Shared destinies and the measurement of social risk equity," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00344468, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:halshs-00344468
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00344468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00344468/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Carole Bernard & Christoph M. Rheinberger & Nicolas Treich, 2018. "Catastrophe Aversion and Risk Equity in an Interdependent World," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(10), pages 4490-4504, October.
    3. Qu, Xiangyu, 2022. "On the measurement of opportunity-dependent inequality under uncertainty," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    4. Ingrid T. Rohde & Kirsten M. Rohde, 2015. "Managing social risks – tradeoffs between risks and inequalities," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 103-124, October.
    5. Robin Chark & Soo Chew, 2015. "A neuroimaging study of preference for strategic uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 209-227, June.
    6. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, Jr., 2012. "Community Resilience and Decision Theory Challenges for Catastrophic Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1919-1934, November.
    7. Chew, Soo Hong & Sagi, Jacob S., 2012. "An inequality measure for stochastic allocations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(4), pages 1517-1544.
    8. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, 2012. "Why Income Inequality Indexes Do Not Apply to Health Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(2), pages 192-196, February.
    9. Adler, Matthew D. & Hammitt, James K. & Treich, Nicolas, 2014. "The social value of mortality risk reduction: VSL versus the social welfare function approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 82-93.
    10. Ingrid M.T. Rohde & Kirsten I.M. Rohde, 2012. "Risk and Inequality in a Social Decision Making Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-045/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    11. Christoph M. Rheinberger & Nicolas Treich, 2017. "Attitudes Toward Catastrophe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(3), pages 609-636, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate

    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:hal:cesptp:halshs-00344468. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.