IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ksa/szemle/173.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A tisztességes elosztás mikroökonómiai elmélete
[The microeconomic theory of fair distribution]

Author

Listed:
  • Bara, Zoltán

Abstract

problémáiknak, amelyeknek több évtizedre visszanyúló hagyományai vannak a modern közgazdaságtanban is. A magyar nyelvű szakirodalomban azonban sajátos módon kevés ilyen témájú elméleti munkát olvashatunk. A tanulmány röviden áttekinti a kiinduló dilemmához kapcsolódó alapelveket, összehasonlítja az azokból eredő elméleti és gyakorlati következményeket. Részletesebben kitér a szupertisztességesség elméletének a fogyasztási javak méltányos elosztására vonatkozó alapvonásaira.

Suggested Citation

  • Bara, Zoltán, 1998. "A tisztességes elosztás mikroökonómiai elmélete [The microeconomic theory of fair distribution]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 558-575.
    • Handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kszemle.hu/tartalom/letoltes.php?id=173
    Download Restriction: Registration and subscription. 3-month embargo period to non-subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Edna Loehman & Andrew Whinston, 1971. "A New Theory of Pricing and Decision-Making for Public Investment," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(2), pages 606-625, Autumn.
    2. Varian, Hal R., 1976. "Two problems in the theory of fairness," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 249-260.
    3. Varian, Hal R., 1974. "Equity, envy, and efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 63-91, September.
    4. Buchanan, Allen, 1985. "Ethics, Efficiency and the Market," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198285335.
    5. Ordover, J. A. & Phelps, E. S., 1979. "The concept of optimal taxation in the overlapping-generations model of capital and wealth," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, August.
    6. Elisha A. Pazner & David Schmeidler, 1978. "Egalitarian Equivalent Allocations: A New Concept of Economic Equity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 92(4), pages 671-687.
    7. Stephen C. Littlechild, 1970. "Peak-Load Pricing of Telephone Calls," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 1(2), pages 191-210, Autumn.
    8. Feldman, Allan M & Kirman, Alan, 1974. "Fairness and Envy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(6), pages 995-1005, December.
    9. Philpotts, Geoffrey, 1983. "Applied Fairness Theory: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(5), pages 1157-1160, December.
    10. Elisha A. Pazner & David Schmeidler, 1974. "A Difficulty in the Concept of Fairness," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(3), pages 441-443.
    11. Edmund S. Phelps, 1973. "Taxation of Wage Income for Economic Justice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 87(3), pages 331-354.
    12. Vincent P. Crawford, 1977. "A Game of Fair Division," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 44(2), pages 235-247.
    13. J. A. Mirrlees, 1971. "An Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(2), pages 175-208.
    14. Kurt W. Rothschild, 1993. "Ethics And Economic Theory," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 379.
    15. Varian, Hal R., 1980. "Redistributive taxation as social insurance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 49-68, August.
    16. Ulph, David, 1978. "On labour supply and the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 492-512, 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. Thomson, William, 2011. "Chapter Twenty-One - Fair Allocation Rules," 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 2, chapter 21, pages 393-506, Elsevier.
    2. Maître Philippe, 1999. "La Notion D'equite : Une Revue," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 107-130, March.
    3. Marc Fleurbaey, 2006. "To Envy or to be Envied? Refinements of No-Envy fot the Compensation Problem," IDEP Working Papers 0603, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France, revised Jul 2006.
    4. Biung†Ghi Ju & Juan D. Moreno†Ternero, 2017. "Fair Allocation Of Disputed Properties," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1279-1301, November.
    5. de Clippel, Geoffroy & Pérez-Castrillo, David & Wettstein, David, 2012. "Egalitarian equivalence under asymmetric information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 413-423.
    6. Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1987. "Pareto efficient and optimal taxation and the new new welfare economics," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 991-1042, Elsevier.
    7. Jean-Paul Chavas & Jay Coggins, 2003. "On fairness and welfare analysis under uncertainty," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 20(2), pages 203-228, March.
    8. Ji-Won Park & Jaeup U. Kim & Cheol-Min Ghim & Chae Un Kim, 2021. "The Boltzmann fair division for distributive justice," Papers 2109.11917, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2021.
    9. Fleurbaey, Marc & Maniquet, Francois, 1996. "Fair allocation with unequal production skills: The No Envy approach to compensation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 71-93, August.
    10. Geoffroy de Clippel, 2010. "Copmment on Egalitarianism under Incomplete Information," Working Papers 2010-4, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    11. Nishimura, Yukihiro, 2003. "Optimal non-linear income taxation for reduction of envy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 363-386, February.
    12. Yukihiro Nishimura, 2008. "Envy Minimization In The Optimal Tax Context," Working Paper 1178, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    13. Kranich, Laurence, 2020. "Resource-envy-free and efficient allocations: A new solution for production economies with dedicated factors," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 1-7.
    14. Elisha A. Pazner, 1976. "Reviews: Recent Thinking on Economic Justice," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 2(1), pages 143-169, February.
    15. Corchon, Luis C. & Iturbe-Ormaetxe, Inigo, 2001. "A Proposal to Unify Some Concepts in the Theory of Fairness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 540-571, December.
    16. Cato, Susumu, 2010. "Local envy-freeness and equal-income Walrasian allocations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 239-241, May.
    17. Roland Iwan Luttens & Erwin Ooghe, 2007. "Is it Fair to ‘Make Work Pay’?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(296), pages 599-626, November.
    18. Spencer Bastani & Daniel Waldenström, 2020. "How Should Capital Be Taxed?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 812-846, September.
    19. Zhan Wang & Jinpeng Ma & Hongwei Zhang, 2023. "Object-based unawareness: Theory and applications," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 8(1), pages 1-55, December.
    20. Shinji Yamashige, 1995. "Fairness in Markets and Government Policies," Working Papers yamashig-95-03, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D30 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - General
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values

    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:ksa:szemle:173. 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: Odon Sok (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kszemle.hu .

    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.