IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v56y2021i1d10.1007_s00355-020-01271-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Measuring Welfare ‘Behind a Veil of Ignorance’

Author

Listed:
  • Moti Michaeli

    (University of Haifa)

Abstract

How should we rank different income distributions? Should we adopt the Rawlsian criterion that focuses on the minimal income in the distribution? Or should we rather maximize the geometric mean, a criterion advocated by gamblers and welfarists alike? This paper microfounds these two criteria by showing that each of them can be obtained by granting veto rights to the members of society ‘behind a veil of ignorance’, where society is represented by the set of regular utilities (Hart 2011). The Rawlsian maximin criterion is obtained by granting each member of society a right to veto acceptance of any candidate income distribution, while the geometric-mean criterion is obtained by granting instead a right to veto rejection of income distributions. This way, the proposed method circumvents the need to arbitrarily choose a representative agent when ranking income distributions. The Rawlsian maximin criterion is further shown to be robust to extending the set of utilities that constitutes “society” to all risk-averse utilities, while the geometric-mean criterion is not as robust.

Suggested Citation

  • Moti Michaeli, 2021. "On Measuring Welfare ‘Behind a Veil of Ignorance’," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(1), pages 57-66, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:56:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s00355-020-01271-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-020-01271-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-020-01271-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-020-01271-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Michele Lombardi & Kaname Miyagishima & Roberto Veneziani, 2016. "Liberal Egalitarianism and the Harm Principle," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 126(597), pages 2173-2196, November.
    2. Dean P. Foster & Sergiu Hart, 2009. "An Operational Measure of Riskiness," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(5), pages 785-814.
    3. Robert J. Aumann & Roberto Serrano, 2008. "An Economic Index of Riskiness," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 810-836, October.
    4. Sheshinski, Eytan, 1972. "Relation between a social welfare function and the gini index of income inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 98-100, February.
    5. Ebert, Udo, 1987. "Size and distribution of incomes as determinants of social welfare," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 23-33, February.
    6. Sergiu Hart, 2011. "Comparing Risks by Acceptance and Rejection," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(4), pages 617-638.
    7. repec:bla:econom:v:50:y:1983:i:197:p:3-17 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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.
    9. Yves Sprumont, 2020. "Nash welfarism and the distributive implications of informational constraints," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(1), pages 49-64, April.
    10. Haim Levy, 1992. "Stochastic Dominance and Expected Utility: Survey and Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 555-593, April.
    11. Yves Sprumont, 2013. "On relative egalitarianism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 1015-1032, April.
    12. Safra, Zvi & Segal, Uzi, 1998. "Constant Risk Aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 19-42, November.
    13. Kaneko, Mamoru & Nakamura, Kenjiro, 1979. "The Nash Social Welfare Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 423-435, March.
    14. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    15. Olivier Jean Blanchard & Stanley Fischer, 1989. "Lectures on Macroeconomics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262022834, April.
    16. John C. Harsanyi, 1953. "Cardinal Utility in Welfare Economics and in the Theory of Risk-taking," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(5), pages 434-434.
    17. Reiko Gotoh & Naoki Yoshihara, 2003. "A class of fair distribution rules à la Rawls and Sen," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 22(1), pages 63-88, August.
    18. Siegel, Frederick W & Hoban, James P, Jr, 1982. "Relative Risk Aversion Revisited," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 64(3), pages 481-487, August.
    19. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    20. Amartya Sen, 1976. "Real National Income," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 43(1), pages 19-39.
    21. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    22. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(4), pages 309-309.
    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. Heller, Yuval & Schreiber, Amnon, 2020. "Short-term investments and indices of risk," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(3), July.
    2. Kadan, Ohad & Liu, Fang, 2014. "Performance evaluation with high moments and disaster risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 131-155.
    3. Amnon Schreiber, 2014. "Economic indices of absolute and relative riskiness," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 309-331, June.
    4. Yuval Heller & Amnon Schreiber, 2020. "Short-Term Investments and Indices of Risk," Papers 2005.06576, arXiv.org.
    5. Turan G. Bali & Nusret Cakici & Fousseni Chabi-Yo, 2011. "A Generalized Measure of Riskiness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(8), pages 1406-1423, August.
    6. Doron Nisani, 2023. "On the General Deviation Measure and the Gini coefficient," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 19(3), pages 599-610, September.
    7. Rolf Aaberge, 2009. "Ranking intersecting Lorenz curves," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(2), pages 235-259, August.
    8. Francois, Joseph & Rojas-Romagosa, Hugo, 2011. "Household inequality, social welfare, and trade," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 422-431, November.
    9. Marc Fleurbaey & Stéphane Zuber, 2021. "Fair Utilitarianism," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 370-401, May.
    10. Hellman, Ziv & Schreiber, Amnon, 2018. "Indexing gamble desirability by extending proportional stochastic dominance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 523-543.
    11. Marilyn Pease & Mark Whitmeyer, 2024. "How to Make an Action Better," Papers 2408.09294, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2024.
    12. Aaberge, Rolf & Havnes, Tarjei & Mogstad, Magne, 2013. "A Theory for Ranking Distribution Functions," IZA Discussion Papers 7738, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Rolf Aaberge, 2003. "Mean-Spread-Preserving Transformations," Discussion Papers 360, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    14. Joseph Francois & Hugo Rojas-Romagosa, 2004. "Household Inequality, Welfare, and the Setting of Trade Policy," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-086/2, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. Levy, Moshe, 2009. "Almost Stochastic Dominance and stocks for the long run," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 250-257, April.
    16. Courtois, Olivier Le & Xu, Xia, 2023. "Semivariance below the maximum: Assessing the performance of economic and financial prospects," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 185-199.
    17. Seidl, Christian & Camacho Cuena, Eva & Morone, Andrea, 2003. "Income Distributions versus Lotteries Happiness, Response-Mode Effects, and Preference," Economics Working Papers 2003-01, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    18. Yoram Amiel & Frank Cowell & Wulf Gaertner, 2012. "Distributional orderings: an approach with seven flavors," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 381-399, September.
    19. Joseph Francis Francois & Hugo ROJAS-ROMAGOSA, 2008. "Equity and International Trade," Economics working papers 2008-14, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    20. Amnon Schreiber, 2012. "An Economic Index of Relative Riskiness," Discussion Paper Series dp597, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

    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:spr:sochwe:v:56:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s00355-020-01271-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.