IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hit/rcnedp/4.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Characterizations of Social Choice Correspondences Based on Equality of Capabilities in a Pure Exchange Economy

Author

Listed:
  • Sakamoto, Norihito

Abstract

This paper examines theoretical properties of Amartya Sen's capability approach in a formal model which describes a simple exchange economy with unequal abilities. Specifically, we define and axiomatically characterize the following two classes of social choice correspondences (SCCs) based on the notion of ""equality of capabilities"": (1) SCCs which assign egalitarian and efficient allocations in terms of a social preference ordering defined on capability sets; (2) SCCs which maximize an intersection of all individuals' capability sets with respect to the relation of set inclusion. Our main results show that in a single-good economy, two SCCs can be characterized by a similar combination of three requirements: principles of equal treatment, Pareto efficiency, and rank preservation. However, in a two or more goods economy, a class of SCCs maximizing an intersection of capabilities cannot be characterized by the above three principles, while they are still necessary conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Sakamoto, Norihito, 2017. "Characterizations of Social Choice Correspondences Based on Equality of Capabilities in a Pure Exchange Economy," RCNE Discussion Paper Series 4, Research Center for Normative Economics, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    • Handle: RePEc:hit:rcnedp:4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/28993/2017dp4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rebeca Echávarri & Iñaki Permanyer, 2008. "Ranking profiles of capability sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(3), pages 521-535, October.
    2. Bossert W., 1996. "Redistribution mechanisms based on individual characteristics," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 51-51, February.
    3. Wulf Gaertner & Yongsheng Xu, 2006. "Capability Sets as the Basis of a New Measure of Human Development," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 311-321.
    4. Yongsheng Xu, 2004. "On ranking linear budget sets in terms of freedom of choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 281-289, February.
    5. Marc Fleurbaey, 2012. "Three Solutions for the Compensation Problem," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Equality of Opportunity The Economics of Responsibility, chapter 2, pages 33-51, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Herrero, Carmen & Iturbe-Ormaetxe, Inigo & Nieto, Jorge, 1998. "Ranking opportunity profiles on the basis of the common opportunities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 273-289, May.
    7. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    8. Tadenuma, Koichi, 2002. "Efficiency First or Equity First? Two Principles and Rationality of Social Choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 462-472, June.
    9. Yongsheng Xu & Naoki Yoshihara, 2022. "Bargaining theory over opportunity assignments and the egalitarian solution," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 198-219, February.
    10. Xu, Yongsheng, 2003. "On ranking compact and comprehensive opportunity sets," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 109-119, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Yongsheng Xu, 2002. "Functioning, capability and the standard of living - an axiomatic approach," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(2), pages 387-399.
    13. Wulf Gaertner & Yongsheng Xu, 2011. "Reference-dependent rankings of sets in characteristics space," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 717-728, October.
    14. Ernesto Savaglio & Stefano Vannucci, 2009. "On the volume-ranking of opportunity sets in economic environments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(1), pages 1-24, June.
    15. Kaname Miyagishima, 2010. "Ranking linear budget sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(1), pages 163-173, June.
    16. Wulf Gaertner, 2012. "Evaluating sets of objects in characteristics space," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 303-321, July.
    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. Yongsheng Xu & Naoki Yoshihara, 2022. "Bargaining theory over opportunity assignments and the egalitarian solution," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 198-219, February.
    2. Yongsheng Xu & Naoki Yoshihara, 2020. "Nonconvex Bargaining Problems: Some Recent Developments," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 7-41, November.
    3. Wulf Gaertner, 2012. "Evaluating sets of objects in characteristics space," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 303-321, July.
    4. Bleichrodt, Han & Quiggin, John, 2013. "Capabilities as menus: A non-welfarist basis for QALY evaluation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 128-137.
    5. Fabio Boncinelli & Leonardo Casini, 2014. "A Comparison of the Well-Being of Agricultural and Non Agricultural Households Using a Multicriterial Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 119(1), pages 183-195, October.
    6. Miyagishima, Kaname, 2012. "Ranking linear budget sets with different available goods: A note," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 234-238.
    7. Stefano Vannucci, 2013. "A characterization of height-based extensions of principal filtral opportunity rankings," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, December.
    8. Serge-Christophe Kolm, 2010. "On real economic freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(3), pages 351-375, September.
    9. Xu, Yongsheng, 2003. "On ranking compact and comprehensive opportunity sets," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 109-119, April.
    10. Erwin Ooghe & Erik Schokkaert & Dirk gaer, 2007. "Equality of Opportunity versus Equality of Opportunity Sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(2), pages 209-230, February.
    11. Rebeca Echávarri & Iñaki Permanyer, 2008. "Ranking profiles of capability sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(3), pages 521-535, October.
    12. Reiko Gotoh & Ryo Kambayashi, 2023. "What the Welfare State Left Behind—Securing the Capability to Move for the Vulnerable," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 18(1), pages 124-143, January.
    13. Wulf Gaertner & Yongsheng Xu, 2011. "Reference-dependent rankings of sets in characteristics space," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 717-728, October.
    14. Thomson, William, 2011. "Chapter Twenty-One - Fair Allocation Rules," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 21, pages 393-506, Elsevier.
    15. Kristof Bosmans & Z. Emel Öztürk, 2022. "Laissez-faire versus Pareto," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(4), pages 741-751, May.
    16. 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.
    17. Ferreira, Francisco H. G. & Peragine, Vito, 2015. "Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 8994, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Schokkaert, Erik & Van de gaer, Dirk & Vandenbroucke, Frank & Luttens, Roland Iwan, 2004. "Responsibility sensitive egalitarianism and optimal linear income taxation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 151-182, September.
    19. Ernesto Screpanti, 2006. "Taxation, Social Goods And The Distribution Of Freedom," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 1-12, February.
    20. Marc Fleurbaey & Vito Peragine, 2013. "Ex Ante Versus Ex Post Equality of Opportunity," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(317), pages 118-130, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    capability approach; equality of capabilities; common capability;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I30 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

    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:hit:rcnedp:4. 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: Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nehitjp.html .

    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.