IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/inq/inqwps/ecineq2022-629.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the measurement of well-being with reference consumption

Author

Listed:
  • Domenico Moramarco

    (Université Libre de Bruxelles ,ECARES)

  • François Maniquet

    (CORE/LIDAM, UCLouvain, and LISER, Luxembourg)

Abstract

We axiomatically study how to measure well-being when individuals have heterogeneous preferences and consumption bundles are evaluated by comparison with some reference bundle (a poverty line bundle, an index of needs, the average consumption in a reference group, etc.). If only the reference bundle matters, Deaton (1979)'s distance function turns out to be the only measure satisfying basic axioms. If the measure is allowed to depend on preferences at the reference, we resort to the lattice structure of the set of indifference contours. We require, for instance, that well-being measured at the supremum (resp. infimum) of two indifference contours be equal to the maximum (resp. minimum) of their corresponding well-being levels, for constant indifference contour at the reference. We find these axioms to have different implications depending on the preference domain and we characterize well-being measures that satisfy all possible combinations of these axioms. One prominent measure computes the ratio between equivalent income at consumption and at reference, with prices being chosen to maximize well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • Domenico Moramarco & François Maniquet, 2022. "On the measurement of well-being with reference consumption," Working Papers 629, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    • Handle: RePEc:inq:inqwps:ecineq2022-629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ecineq.org/milano/WP/ECINEQ2022-629.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2022
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marc Fleurbaey & François Maniquet, 2018. "Inequality-averse well-being measurement," LIDAM Reprints CORE 2941, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    2. Koen Decancq & Marc Fleurbaey & Erik Schokkaert, 2017. "Wellbeing Inequality and Preference Heterogeneity," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(334), pages 210-238, April.
    3. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Georg Kirchsteiger & Arno Riedl, 1993. "Does Fairness Prevent Market Clearing? An Experimental Investigation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(2), pages 437-459.
    5. AndrewE. Clark & Claudia Senik, 2010. "Who Compares to Whom? The Anatomy of Income Comparisons in Europe," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(544), pages 573-594, May.
    6. Fehr, Ernst & Kirchsteiger, Georg & Riedl, Arno, 1998. "Gift exchange and reciprocity in competitive experimental markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-34, January.
    7. Andrew E. Clark & Paul Frijters & Michael A. Shields, 2008. "Relative Income, Happiness, and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 46(1), pages 95-144, March.
    8. Christopher P. Chambers & Alan D. Miller, 2014. "Inefficiency Measurement," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(2), pages 79-92, May.
    9. Fleurbaey, Marc & Maniquet, François, 2017. "Fairness and well-being measurement," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 119-126.
    10. Andrew E. Clark, 2018. "Four Decades of the Economics of Happiness: Where Next?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 64(2), pages 245-269, June.
    11. Blackorby, Charles & Bossert, Walter & Donaldson, David, 1997. "Critical-Level Utilitarianism and the Population-Ethics Dilemma," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 197-230, October.
    12. Christensen, Flemming & Hougaard, Jens Leth & Keiding, Hans, 1999. "An axiomatic characterization of efficiency indices," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 33-37, April.
    13. Marc Fleurbaey & François Maniquet, 2018. "Inequality†averse well†being measurement," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 14(1), pages 35-50, March.
    14. Aditi Dimri & François Maniquet, 2020. "Income poverty measurement in India: defining group-specific poverty lines or taking preferences into account?," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 18(2), pages 137-156, June.
    15. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    16. Fleurbaey, Marc & Blanchet, Didier, 2013. "Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199767199.
    17. Samuelson, Paul A, 1977. "Reaffirming the Existence of "Reasonable" Bergson-Samuelson Social Welfare Functions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 44(173), pages 81-88, February.
    18. Varian, Hal R., 1974. "Equity, envy, and efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 63-91, September.
    19. Blackorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1987. "Welfare ratios and distributionally sensitive cost-benefit analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 265-290, December.
    20. Martin Dufwenberg & Paul Heidhues & Georg Kirchsteiger & Frank Riedel & Joel Sobel, 2011. "Other-Regarding Preferences in General Equilibrium," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(2), pages 613-639.
    21. Jens Hougaard & Hans Keiding, 1998. "On the Functional Form of an Efficiency Index," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 103-111, March.
    22. Sen, Amartya Kumar, 1970. "The Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal," Scholarly Articles 3612779, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    23. Sen, Amartya, 1970. "The Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(1), pages 152-157, Jan.-Feb..
    24. Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-577, May.
    25. Angus Deaton, 1979. "The Distance Function in Consumer Behaviour with Applications to Index Numbers and Optimal Taxation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(3), pages 391-405.
    26. Kirchsteiger, Georg, 1994. "The role of envy in ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 373-389, December.
    27. Samuelson, Paul A, 1974. "Complementarity-An Essay on the 40th Anniversary of the Hicks-Allen Revolution in Demand Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1255-1289, December.
    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. François Maniquet & Domenico Moramarco, 2022. "On the Measurement of Well-Being with Reference Consumption," Working Papers ECARES 2022-41, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Decancq, Koen & Nys, Annemie, 2021. "Non-parametric well-being comparisons," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    3. Martin Dufwenberg & Paul Heidhues & Georg Kirchsteiger & Frank Riedel & Joel Sobel, 2011. "Other-Regarding Preferences in General Equilibrium," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(2), pages 613-639.
    4. Marc Fleurbaey & François Maniquet, 2019. "Well-being measurement with non-classical goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(3), pages 765-786, October.
    5. Martin Dufwenberg & Paul Heidhues & Georg Kirchsteiger & Frank Riedel & Joel Sobel, 2011. "Other-Regarding Preferences in General Equilibrium," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 78(2), pages 613-639.
    6. Rafael Treibich, 2019. "Welfare egalitarianism with other-regarding preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(1), pages 1-28, January.
    7. Bereby-Meyer, Yoella & Niederle, Muriel, 2005. "Fairness in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 173-186, February.
    8. Christian Thoeni & Simon Gaechter, 2011. "Peer Effects and Social Preferences in Voluntary Cooperation," Discussion Papers 2011-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    9. Klaus M. Schmidt, 2011. "Social Preferences and Competition," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43, pages 207-231, August.
    10. Fleurbaey, Marc & Maniquet, François, 2017. "Addendum to “Fairness and well-being measurement”," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 127-128.
    11. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    12. Bental, Benjamin & Kragl, Jenny, 2021. "Inequality and incentives with societal other-regarding preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1298-1324.
    13. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2005. "The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism – Experimental Evidence and New Theories," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 66, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    14. Kovarik, Jaromir, 2009. "Social Preferences - Literature Survey," IKERLANAK 6416, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    15. Kragl, Jenny & Bental, Benjamin, 2020. "Other-Regarding Preferences and Incentives in the Societal Context," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224547, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Vera Popva, 2010. "What renders financial advisors less treacherous? - On commissions and reciprocity -," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-036, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    17. Fleurbaey, Marc & Maniquet, François, 2017. "Fairness and well-being measurement," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 119-126.
    18. Grossmann, Volker, 2002. "Is it rational to internalize the personal norm that one should reciprocate?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 27-48, February.
    19. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Why Social Preferences Matter - The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition," IEW - Working Papers 084, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    20. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, "undated". "Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity - Evidence and Economic Applications," IEW - Working Papers 075, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Well-being measure; heterogeneous preferences; reference; lattice.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

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

    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:inq:inqwps:ecineq2022-629. 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: Maria Ana Lugo (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecineea.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.