IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v42y2001i3p203-231.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nash social welfare orderings

Author

Listed:
  • Naumova, Natalia
  • Yanovskaya, Elena

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Naumova, Natalia & Yanovskaya, Elena, 2001. "Nash social welfare orderings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 203-231, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:42:y:2001:i:3:p:203-231
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4896(01)00070-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    2. John A. Weymark & Kai-yuen Tsui, 1997. "Social welfare orderings for ratio-scale measurable utilities," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 10(2), pages 241-256.
    3. Kaneko, Mamoru & Nakamura, Kenjiro, 1979. "The Nash Social Welfare Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 423-435, March.
    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. Marco Mariotti & Roberto Veneziani, 2018. "Opportunities as Chances: Maximising the Probability that Everybody Succeeds," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(611), pages 1609-1633, June.
    2. Hans Peters & Dries Vermeulen, 2012. "WPO, COV and IIA bargaining solutions for non-convex bargaining problems," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 851-884, November.
    3. Qin, Cheng-Zhong & Tan, Guofu & Wong, Adam Chi Leung, 2019. "Implementation of Nash bargaining solutions with non-convexity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 46-49.

    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. Nikhil Garg & Ashish Goel & Benjamin Plaut, 2021. "Markets for public decision-making," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(4), pages 755-801, May.
    2. MORENO-TERNERO, Juan & OSTERDAL, Lars P., 2014. "Normative foundations for equity-sensitive population health evaluation functions," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2014031, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    3. Thomas Saaty & Luis Vargas, 2012. "The possibility of group choice: pairwise comparisons and merging functions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 481-496, March.
    4. Xu, Yongsheng & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2013. "Rationality and solutions to nonconvex bargaining problems: Rationalizability and Nash solutions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 66-70.
    5. Yew‐Kwang Ng, 1981. "Bentham or Nash? On the Acceptable Form of Social Welfare Functions," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 57(3), pages 238-250, September.
    6. Mamoru Kaneko, 2019. "Expected Utility Theory with Probability Grids and Preference Formation," Working Papers 1902, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    7. Barkaoui, Ahmed & Dragicevic, Arnaud Z., 2016. "Nash bargaining and renegotiation with social preferences: case of the roundwood log supply contracts in the French timber market," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 90-100.
    8. 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.
    9. Amartya Sen, 1987. "Gender and Cooperative Conflicts," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-1987-018, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. Markus Brill & Paul Gölz & Dominik Peters & Ulrike Schmidt-Kraepelin & Kai Wilker, 2022. "Approval-based apportionment," Post-Print hal-03816043, HAL.
    11. d'Aspremont, Claude & Gevers, Louis, 2002. "Social welfare functionals and interpersonal comparability," 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 1, chapter 10, pages 459-541, Elsevier.
    12. Hanany, Eran, 2008. "The ordinal Nash social welfare function," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(5-6), pages 405-422, April.
    13. Piotr Żebrowski & Ulf Dieckmann & Åke Brännström & Oskar Franklin & Elena Rovenskaya, 2022. "Sharing the Burdens of Climate Mitigation and Adaptation: Incorporating Fairness Perspectives into Policy Optimization Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-24, March.
    14. Sprumont, Yves, 2018. "Belief-weighted Nash aggregation of Savage preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 222-245.
    15. Kaneko, Mamoru, 1982. "The optimal progressive income tax : The existence and the limit tax rates," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 193-221, September.
    16. Eran Hanany, 2001. "Ordinal Nash Social Welfare Function," Discussion Papers 1325, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    17. Siddharth Barman & Sanath Kumar Krishnamurthy & Rohit Vaish, 2018. "Greedy Algorithms for Maximizing Nash Social Welfare," Papers 1801.09046, arXiv.org.
    18. Iana Okhrimenko, 2021. "The Dichotomy of Procedural and Distributive Justice in the Theory of Social Choice," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 207-226.
    19. Ebert, Udo & Welsch, Heinz, 2004. "Meaningful environmental indices: a social choice approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 270-283, March.
    20. Mamoru Kaneko, 2020. "Expected utility theory with probability grids and preference formation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(3), pages 723-764, October.

    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:eee:matsoc:v:42:y:2001:i:3:p:203-231. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505565 .

    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.