IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00246562.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Social choice and the indexing dilemma

Author

Listed:
  • Marc Fleurbaey

    () (CERSES - UMR 8137 - Centre de recherche sens, ethique, société - UPD5 - Université Paris Descartes - Paris 5 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

This paper distinguishes an index ordering and a social ordering function as a simple way to formalize the indexing problem in the social choice framework. Two main conclusions are derived. First, the alleged dilemma between welfarism and perfectionnism is shown to involve a third possibility, exemplified by the fairness approach to social choice. Second, the idea that an individual is better off than another whenever he has more (goods, functionings...) in all dimensions, which is known to enter in conflict with the Pareto principle, can be partly salvaged by adopting the fairness approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Marc Fleurbaey, 2007. "Social choice and the indexing dilemma," Post-Print hal-00246562, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00246562
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00246562
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Hoberg, Nikolai & Strunz, Sebastian, 2018. "When Individual Preferences Defy Sustainability — Can Merit Good Arguments Close the Gap?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 286-293.
    2. Gotoh, Reiko & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2013. "Securing Basic Well-being for All," CCES Discussion Paper Series 48, Center for Research on Contemporary Economic Systems, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University.
    3. Yang, Lin, 2017. "The relationship between poverty and inequality: concepts and measurement," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103491, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Marc Fleurbaey & Erik Schokkaert & Koen Decancq, 2008. "What Good is Happiness?," OPHI Working Papers 20, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    5. Koen Decancq & Maria Ana Lugo, 2008. "Setting Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Well-Being," OPHI Working Papers 18, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    6. Lucio Esposito & Enrica Chiappero‐Martinetti, 2019. "Eliciting, Applying And Exploring Multidimensional Welfare Weights: Evidence From The Field," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(S1), pages 204-227, November.
    7. Lin Yang, 2017. "The relationship between poverty and inequality: Concepts and measurement," CASE Papers /205, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    8. John A. Weymark, 2017. "Conundrums for nonconsequentialists," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 269-294, February.
    9. Nikolai Hoberg & Stefan Baumgärtner, 2014. "Value pluralism, trade-offs and efficiencies," Working Paper Series in Economics 311, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    well-being; Pareto; social choice; indexing;

    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:journl:hal-00246562. 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: (CCSD). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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 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.

    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.