A pragmatic theory of responsibility for the egalitarian planner

Roemer, John E.

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511528293.011

Cited by 174 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

182

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A second approach is to consider all inequalities in prevention use which are not explained by needs and preferences as unfair. This is in line with the equality of access view (with the assumption that time and money constraints are effectively equal across individuals) ((Le Grand, 1982;Mooney, 1983, Culyer andWagstaff, 1993)) and with an equality of opportunity approach ( (Roemer, 1993;Roemer, 1998;Roemer, 2002)) (once one has taken into account correlation between needs and socio-economic status, see Fleurbay and Schokkaert, 2012). Our empirical approach considers a careful standardization of needs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Assessing inequalities in preventive care use in Europe

Carrieri¹,

Wübker²

2013

Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The working papers published in the Series constitute work in progress circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comments. Views expressed represent exclusively the authors' own opinions and do not necessarily refl ect those of the editors. Terms of use: Documents in Ruhr Economic Papers #371

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Assessing inequalities in preventive care use in Europe

Carrieri¹,

Wübker²

2013

Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dworkin (1981aDworkin ( , 1981b, for example, argued that egalitarians should seek to equalize resources rather than outcomes. Roemer (1993Roemer ( , 1998 introduced a model which separated the determinants of the welfare outcomes a person experiences into circumstances and e¤ort. He argued that individuals should only be held responsible for the latter.…”

Section: The Importance Of Inequality Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast to e¤ort, a person has no choice with respect to the circumstances of the environment he is born into. In Roemer's (1993Roemer's ( , 1998 framework, an equal-opportunity policy is an intervention which 'levels the playing …eld' by ensuring that equal outcomes in achievement accrue to individuals who have expended the same amount of e¤ort. 23 Whilst inequality of opportunity is beyond the scope of this paper, its importance for the analysis of inequality is undeniable.…”

Section: The Importance Of Inequality Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 There have also been some recent empirical attempts to measure inequality of opportunity. For example, drawing on Roemer's (1993Roemer's ( , 1998) distinction between circumstances and e¤ort, Bourguignon, Ferreira and Menéndez (2005) have decomposed earnings inequality in Brazil into a component due to unequal opportunities and a residual term. They found that around a quarter of total inequality was due to di¤erences in observable circumstances.…”

Section: The Importance Of Inequality Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Global Interpersonal Inequality: Trends and Measurement

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses different approaches to the measurement of global interpersonal in equality. Trends in global interpersonal inequality during are measured using data from UNU-WIDER's World Income Inequality Database. In order to better understand the trends, global interpersonal inequality is decomposed into within-country and between-country inequality. The paper illustrates that the relationship between global interpersonal inequality and these constituent components is a complex one. In particular, we demonstrate that the changes in China s and India s income distributions over the past 30 years have simultaneously caused inequality to rise domestically in those countries, while tending to reduce global inter-personal inequality. In light of these findings, we reflect on the meaning and policy relevance of global vis-à-vis domestic inequality measures.Keywords: global interpersonal inequality, inequality, inequality measurement JEL classification: D31, D63, E01, O15 Acknowledgements: We are grateful to seminar participants at the universities of Helsinki, Oxford, Bielefeld, and Beijing Normal University, for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. All the errors are ours. Global interpersonal inequality Trends and measurementMiguel Niño-Zarazúa y , Laurence Roope z and Finn Tarp x ABSTRACT This paper discusses di¤erent approaches to the measurement of global interpersonal inequality. Trends in global interpersonal inequality during 1975-2005 are measured using data from UNU-WIDER's World Income Inequality Database. In order to better understand the trends, global interpersonal inequality is decomposed into within-country and between-country inequality. The paper illustrates that the relationship between global interpersonal inequality and these constituent components is a complex one. In particular, we demonstrate that the changes in China's and India's income distributions over the past 30 years have simultaneously caused inequality to rise domestically in those countries, while tending to reduce global interpersonal inequality. In light of these …ndings, we re ‡ect on the meaning and policy relevance of global vis-à-vis domestic inequality measures.

show abstract

“…e-mail: bertil.tungodden@nhh.no. be accepted, while inequalities arising from non-responsibility factors should be eliminated (see, among others, Dworkin (1981), Arneson (1989), Cohen (1989), Le Grand (1991), Roemer (1993Roemer ( , 1996Roemer ( , 1998, Bossert (1995), Fleurbaey (1994Fleurbaey ( , 1995) and Bossert and Fleurbaey (1996)). They disagree, however, on where to draw the responsibility cut.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relocating the responsibility cut: should more responsibility imply less redistribution?

Cappelen

Tungodden

2006

Politics, Philosophy & Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liberal egalitarian theories of justice argue that inequalities arising from non-responsibility factors should be eliminated, but that inequalities arising from responsibility factors should be accepted. The paper discusses how the fairness argument for redistribution within a liberal egalitarian framework is a¤ected by a relocation of the cut between responsibility and non-responsibility factors. The paper also discusses the claim that equalization of some non-responsibility factors will reduce the ideal level of redistribution.

show abstract

A pragmatic theory of responsibility for the egalitarian planner

Cited by 174 publications

References 0 publications

Assessing inequalities in preventive care use in Europe

Assessing inequalities in preventive care use in Europe

Global Interpersonal Inequality: Trends and Measurement

Relocating the responsibility cut: should more responsibility imply less redistribution?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About