IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00294466.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology

Author

Listed:
  • Antoinette Baujard

    (GATE Lyon Saint-Étienne - Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon - Saint-Etienne - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - UJM - Université Jean Monnet - Saint-Étienne - EM - EMLyon Business School - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

A wide diversity of rankings of opportunity sets are characterized through what is now commonly called the freedom of choice literature. An op-portunity set is better ranked when it provides more freedom. This survey is or-ganized as a typology of the rankings, according to the specific conception of free-dom they capture: freedom of choice, freedom as autonomy, freedom as exercise of significant choices, negative freedom. The role of preferences in freedom rankings is discussed in the conclusion.Keywords opportunity sets, freedom of choice, well-being, typology

Suggested Citation

  • Antoinette Baujard, 2007. "Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology," Post-Print halshs-00294466, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00294466
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00294466
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00294466/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin van Hees, 2004. "Freedom of choice and diversity of options: Some difficulties," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 253-266, February.
    2. Eckehard F. Rosenbaum, 2000. "On Measuring Freedom," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 205-227, April.
    3. Pattanaik, Prasanta K. & Xu, Yongsheng, 2000. "On diversity and freedom of choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 123-130, September.
    4. Ian Carter, 2004. "Choice, freedom, and freedom of choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 61-81, February.
    5. Sugden, Robert, 1985. "Liberty, Preference, and Choice," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 213-229, October.
    6. Walter Bossert, 1996. "Opportunity sets and individual well-being," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 14(1), pages 97-112.
    7. Arlegi, R. & Besada, M. & Nieto, J. & Vazquez, C., 2005. "Freedom of choice: the leximax criterion in the infinite case," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 1-15, January.
    8. Gravel, Nicolas, 1994. "Can a Ranking of Opportunity Sets Attach an Intrinsic Importance to Freedom of Choice?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 454-458, May.
    9. Klaus Nehring & Clemens Puppe, 2002. "A Theory of Diversity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 1155-1198, May.
    10. Martin van Hees, 1998. "On the Analysis of Negative Freedom," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 175-197, October.
    11. BOSSERT, Walter & PATTANAIK, Prasanta K. & XU, Yongsheng, 2001. "The Measurement of Diversity," Cahiers de recherche 2001-17, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
    12. Nicolas Gravel, 1998. "Ranking opportunity sets on the basis of their freedom of choice and their ability to satisfy preferences: A difficulty," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15(3), pages 371-382.
    13. Antoinette Baujard, 2006. "Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 200611, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    14. Pattanaik, Prasanta K. & Xu, Yongsheng, 2000. "On Ranking Opportunity Sets in Economic Environments," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 48-71, July.
    15. Vitorocco Peragine, 1999. "The Distribution and Redistribution of Opportunity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 37-70, February.
    16. Felix E. Oppenheim, 2004. "Social freedom: Definition, measurability, valuation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 22(1), pages 175-185, February.
    17. Walter Bossert & Prasanta K. Pattanaik & Yongsheng Xu, 2003. "Similarity of Options and the Measurement of Diversity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 405-421, October.
    18. Antonio Romero-Medina, 2001. "More on preference and freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(1), pages 179-191.
    19. Bervoets, Sebastian & Gravel, Nicolas, 2007. "Appraising diversity with an ordinal notion of similarity: An axiomatic approach," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 259-273, May.
    20. Prasanta Pattanaik & Yongsheng Xu, 1998. "On Preference and Freedom," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 173-198, April.
    21. Puppe, Clemens, 1996. "An Axiomatic Approach to "Preference for Freedom of Choice"," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 174-199, January.
    22. Ricardo Arlegi & Jorge Nieto, 2001. "Ranking opportunity sets: An approach based on the preference for flexibility," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(1), pages 23-36.
    23. Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-577, May.
    24. Bossert Walter & Pattanaik Prasanta K. & Xu Yongsheng, 1994. "Ranking Opportunity Sets: An Axiomatic Approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 326-345, August.
    25. Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    26. Haslett, D. W., 1990. "What is Utility?," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 65-94, April.
    27. Prasanta K. PATTANAIK & Yongsheng XU, 1990. "On Ranking Opportunity Sets in Terms of Freedom of Choice," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1990036, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    28. repec:bla:jecsur:v:13:y:1999:i:1:p:37-69 is not listed on IDEAS
    29. Amartya SEN, 1990. "Welfare, Freedom and Social Choice: a Reply," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1990040, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    30. Arlegi, Ricardo & Nieto, Jorge, 2001. "Incomplete preferences and the preference for flexibility," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 151-165, March.
    31. Sebastiano Bavetta & Marco Del Seta, 2001. "Constraints and the Measurement of Freedom of Choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 213-238, May.
    32. Sen, Amartya, 1991. "Welfare, preference and freedom," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 15-29, October.
    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. Antoinette Baujard, 2013. "Value judgments and economics expertise," Working Papers 1314, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    2. Antoinette Baujard, 2006. "Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 200611, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    3. Rommeswinkel, Hendrik, 2011. "Measuring Freedom in Games," MPRA Paper 106426, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 03 Mar 2021.
    4. Niels Boissonnet & Alexis Ghersengorin, 2022. "Reactance: a Freedom-Based Theory of Choice," Working Papers hal-03672722, HAL.
    5. Antoinette Baujard, 2007. "Commensurable freedoms in the capability approach," Post-Print halshs-00294563, HAL.

    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. Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    2. Ricardo Arlegi, 2005. "Freedom Of Choice And Conflict Resolution," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 0502, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    3. Ronen Shnayderman, 2016. "Ian Carter’s non-evaluative theory of freedom and diversity: a critique," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 39-55, January.
    4. Martin Hees, 2010. "The specific value of freedom," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(4), pages 687-703, October.
    5. Bervoets, Sebastian & Gravel, Nicolas, 2007. "Appraising diversity with an ordinal notion of similarity: An axiomatic approach," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 259-273, May.
    6. Gaetano Gaballo & Ernesto Savaglio, 2012. "On Revealed Diversity," Department of Economics University of Siena 635, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    7. James E. Foster, 2010. "Freedom, Opportunity and Wellbeing," Working Papers 2010-15, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
    8. Gaetano Gaballo & Ernesto Savaglio, 2012. "On revealed diversity," Working Papers 254, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    9. Gekker, Ruvin & Piggins, Ashley, 2009. "Evaluating Opportunities When People are Uncertainty Averse," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 40(1), pages 109-116.
    10. Rommeswinkel, Hendrik, 2011. "Measuring Freedom in Games," MPRA Paper 106426, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 03 Mar 2021.
    11. Arlegi, Ritxar & Dimitrov, Dinko, 2011. "On freedom, lack of information and the preference for easy choices," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 364, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    12. Xu, Yongsheng, 2003. "On ranking compact and comprehensive opportunity sets," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 109-119, April.
    13. Arlegi, R. & Dimitrov, D.A., 2004. "On Procedural Freedom of Choice," Discussion Paper 2004-9, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    14. Vito Peragine & Antonio Romero-Medina, 2006. "On Preference, Freedom and Diversity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(1), pages 29-40, August.
    15. Marcello Basili & Stefano Vannucci, 2013. "Diversity as width," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 913-936, March.
    16. Johan Gustafsson, 2010. "Freedom of choice and expected compromise," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(1), pages 65-79, June.
    17. Jimena Galindo & Levent Ülkü, 2020. "Diversity relations over menus," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(2), pages 229-242, August.
    18. Walter Bossert, 1998. "Opportunity Sets and the Measurement of Information," Discussion Papers 98/6, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
    19. Iwata, Yukinori, 2007. "A variant of non-consequentialism and its characterization," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 284-295, May.
    20. Prasanta K. Pattanaik, 2018. "Individual Freedom and Welfare Economics," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 16(1), pages 1-12, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    opportunity sets; freedom of choice; well-being; typology; ensemble d'opportunité; liberté de choix; bien-être; typologie;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00294466. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.