IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iep/wpidep/0304.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

About the Right Weight of the Social Welfare Function when Needs Differ

Author

Listed:

Abstract

When equivalence scales are used to compute the well-being of individuals, two possible weighting methods of the different household types have been proposed, the first one resorts to the family size and the second to the equivalence scale itself. The latter is criticized on the ground that it does not respect an anonymity axiom. We show that this criticism vanishes in the standard microeconomic setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Alain Trannoy, 2003. "About the Right Weight of the Social Welfare Function when Needs Differ," IDEP Working Papers 0304, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France.
  • Handle: RePEc:iep:wpidep:0304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.idep-fr.org/IMG/document/dt/dt0304.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ebert, Udo, 1997. "Social Welfare When Needs Differ: An Axiomatic Approach," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(254), pages 233-244, May.
    2. Glewwe, Paul, 1991. "Household equivalence scales and the measurement of inequality : Transfers from the poor to the rich could decrease inequality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 211-216, March.
    3. Bourguignon, Francois, 1989. "Family size and social utility : Income distribution dominance criteria," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 67-80, September.
    4. Udo Ebert, 1999. "Using equivalent income of equivalent adults to rank income distributions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 16(2), pages 233-258.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Huiru Zhao & Sen Guo & Qi Zhang & Chunjie Li, 2014. "Social Welfare Evaluation of Electric Universal Service in China: From the Perspective of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 6(8), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Leroux, Justin, 2016. "Accounting for Needs in Cost Sharing," MPRA Paper 73434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Anthony Shorrocks, 2004. "Inequality and welfare evaluation of heterogeneous income distributions," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 2(3), pages 193-218, July.
    4. Fleurbaey, Marc & Hagneré, Cyrille & Trannoy, Alain, 2014. "Welfare comparisons of income distributions and family size: An individualistic approach," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, pages 12-27.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social welfare; equivalence scale; weights; anonymity; indirect utility function;

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I3 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty
    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation

    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:iep:wpidep:0304. 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: (Yves Doazan). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/greqafr.html .

    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 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.

    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.