IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/econom/v59y1992i234p139-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Minimal Liberty

Author

Listed:
  • Sen, Amartya

Abstract

The major purpose of the paper is a comparison of social-choice formulations of liberty with game-form formulations. The set of admissible strategies of different people cannot be considered independently of each other, and a person's "private sphere" has to be defined by identifying permissible combinations of strategies. This move requires invoking social-choice considerations as part of the formulation of game-form rights. Second, the game-form approach concentrates exclusively on the choice aspect of preference. In contrast, the versatility of social choice formulations permits discussion of a much broader range of issues of liberty. It is also demonstrated, inter alia, why contracting cannot eliminate the dilemma of the Paretian liberal, as long as people are free to have or not have such a contract. Copyright 1992 by The London School of Economics and Political Science.

Suggested Citation

  • Sen, Amartya, 1992. "Minimal Liberty," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 59(234), pages 139-159, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:econom:v:59:y:1992:i:234:p:139-59
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0013-0427%28199205%292%3A59%3A234%3C139%3AML%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I&origin=repec
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marco Mariotti & Roberto Veneziani, 2014. "The Liberal Ethics of Non-Interference and the Pareto Principle," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2014-01, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
    2. E. Guzzini & A. Palestrini, 2012. "Coase theorem and exchangeable rights in non-cooperative games," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 83-100, February.
    3. Enrico Guzzini, 2010. "Efficient Nash equilibria, individual rights and Pareto principle: an impossibility result," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(1), pages 103-114.
    4. Kotaro Suzumura, 2002. "Introduction to social choice and welfare," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 442, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    5. Ben McQuillin & Robert Sugden, 2011. "The representation of alienable and inalienable rights: games in transition function form," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 683-706, October.
    6. Walter Bossert & Marc Fleurbaey, 2015. "An Interview with Kotaro Suzumura," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 179-208, January.
    7. Lingfang (Ivy) Li & Donald Saari, 2008. "Sen’s theorem: geometric proof, new interpretations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(3), pages 393-413, October.
    8. Mariotti, Marco & Veneziani, Roberto, 2014. "The Liberal Ethics of Non-Interference and the Pareto Principle," SIRE Discussion Papers 2014-016, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    9. Kotaro Suzumura, 2005. "An interview with Paul Samuelson: welfare economics, “old” and “new”, and social choice theory," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 25(2), pages 327-356, December.
    10. Xu, Yongsheng, 2000. "Non‐Discrimination and the Pareto Principle," Economic Review, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 51(1), pages 54-60, January.
    11. Bünger Björn & Prinz Aloys, 2010. "Staatliche Glücksförderung? Karl Popper, Richard Layard und das Rauchen / Should public policy pursue happiness? Karl Popper, Richard Layard and smoking," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 61(1), pages 169-190, January.
    12. Steven Pressman & Gale Summerfield, 2000. "The Economic Contributions of Amartya Sen," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 89-113.
    13. Mathias Risse, 2001. "What to Make of the Liberal Paradox?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 169-196, March.
    14. Antoinette Baujard, 2010. "Collective interest vs. individual interest in Bentham's Felicific Calculus. Questioning welfarism and fairness," Post-Print halshs-00528587, HAL.
    15. Dinko Dimitrov, 2001. "Fuzzy Preferences, Liberalism and Non-discrimination," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 63-76.
    16. Berrens, Robert P. & Polasky, Stephen, 1995. "The Paretian Liberal Paradox and ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 45-56, July.
    17. Joana Gonçalves, 2005. "A spatial interaction model for agricultural uses - An application to understand the historical evolution of land use on a small island," ERSA conference papers ersa05p258, European Regional Science Association.
    18. Maurice Salles, 2006. "La théorie du choix social : de l'importance des mathématiques," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 200617, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    19. Perote-Pena, Juan & Piggins, Ashley, 2005. "Pareto efficiency with spatial rights," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 265-283, April.
    20. Herrade Igersheim, 2013. "Invoking a Cartesian product structure on social states," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 463-477, April.
    21. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:30:y:2010:i:1:p:103-114 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    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:bla:econom:v:59:y:1992:i:234:p:139-59. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.