IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology

  • Antoinette Baujard

    (CREM - Centre de Recherche en Economie et Management - CNRS : UMR6211 - Université de Rennes I - Université de Caen)

A wide diversity of rankings of opportunity sets are characterized through what is now commonly called the freedom of choice literature. An op-portunity set is better ranked when it provides more freedom. This survey is or-ganized as a typology of the rankings, according to the specific conception of free-dom they capture: freedom of choice, freedom as autonomy, freedom as exercise of significant choices, negative freedom. The role of preferences in freedom rankings is discussed in the conclusion.Keywords opportunity sets, freedom of choice, well-being, typology

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/29/44/66/PDF/Baujard_2007b_ROST_-_Hoe_24_2_1-24.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by HAL in its series Post-Print with number halshs-00294466.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published, Homo Oeconomicus, 2007, 24, 2, 1-24
Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00294466
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00294466/en/
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Sen, Amartya, 1991. "Welfare, preference and freedom," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 15-29, October.
  2. Sebastiano Bavetta & Marco Del Seta, 2001. "Constraints and the Measurement of Freedom of Choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 213-238, May.
  3. Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K. & Xu, Y., 2001. "The Measurement of Diversity," Cahiers de recherche 2001-17, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
  4. Bossert Walter & Pattanaik Prasanta K. & Xu Yongsheng, 1994. "Ranking Opportunity Sets: An Axiomatic Approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 326-345, August.
  5. Sebastian Bervoets & Nicolas Gravel, 2003. "Appraising diversity with an ordinal notion of similarity: an Axiomatic approach," IDEP Working Papers 0308, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France.
  6. Walter Bossert, 1996. "Opportunity sets and individual well-being," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 97-112.
  7. 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.
  8. Peragine, Vitorocco, 1999. " The Distribution and Redistribution of Opportunity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 37-69, February.
  9. Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-77, May.
  10. Haslett, D. W., 1990. "What is Utility?," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(01), pages 65-94, April.
  11. Nehring,K. und C.Puppe, 1999. "A Theory of Diversity," Discussion Paper Serie A 605, University of Bonn, Germany.
  12. Antonio Romero-Medina, 2001. "More on preference and freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 179-191.
  13. Antoinette Baujard, 2007. "Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology," Post-Print halshs-00294466, HAL.
  14. Gravel, Nicolas, 1994. "Can a Ranking of Opportunity Sets Attach an Intrinsic Importance to Freedom of Choice?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 454-58, May.
  15. Antoinette Baujard, 2006. "Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200611, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
  16. Arlegi, R. & Besada, M. & Nieto, J. & Vazquez, C., 2005. "Freedom of choice: the leximax criterion in the infinite case," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 1-15, January.
  17. Martin van Hees, 2004. "Freedom of choice and diversity of options: Some difficulties," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 253-266, 02.
  18. Pattanaik, Prasanta K. & Xu, Yongsheng, 2000. "On Ranking Opportunity Sets in Economic Environments," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 48-71, July.
  19. Felix E. Oppenheim, 2004. "Social freedom: Definition, measurability, valuation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 175-185, 02.
  20. Nicolas Gravel, 1998. "Ranking opportunity sets on the basis of their freedom of choice and their ability to satisfy preferences: A difficulty," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 371-382.
  21. Sugden, Robert, 1985. "Liberty, Preference, and Choice," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(02), pages 213-229, October.
  22. Pattanaik, Prasanta K. & Xu, Yongsheng, 2000. "On diversity and freedom of choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 123-130, September.
  23. Ian Carter, 2004. "Choice, freedom, and freedom of choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 61-81, 02.
  24. Arlegi, Ricardo & Nieto, Jorge, 2001. "Incomplete preferences and the preference for flexibility," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 151-165, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00294466. 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)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.