IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cenwps/022011.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Equal opportunity in educational contexts: Comparing the feasibility of divergent conceptualizations

Author

Listed:
  • Kappius, Robert

Abstract

For political advice towards equal opportunities in educational policy fields, different conceptualizations of the term coexist. While e.g. Roemer and Van de Gaer focused on outcome opportunities, but differed with respect to individual versus group perspective, other scholars like Sen and Thomson interpreted the norm to reflect equal initial choice sets, but differed in their interpretation of relevant choice alternatives. Normative content being partly delegated to political debate, those concepts still incorporate different framings for interpreting equality of opportunity and consequently trigger biased policies. To address this shortcoming, I propose a multidimensional scope of equal opportunity interpretations and distinguish feasibility issues of different perspectives toward equal opportunities in educational contexts. Contextual characteristics concerning elementary and vocational schooling as well as decentralized education are shown to enable more precise recommendations in terms of feasibility of equal opportunity concepts. Inclusion of divergent conceptualizations may thus prove helpful to overcome feasibility issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Kappius, Robert, 2011. "Equal opportunity in educational contexts: Comparing the feasibility of divergent conceptualizations," The Constitutional Economics Network Working Papers 02-2011, University of Freiburg, Department of Economic Policy and Constitutional Economic Theory.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cenwps:022011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/57640/1/699912830.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bossert W., 1996. "Redistribution mechanisms based on individual characteristics," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 51-51, February.
    2. François Maniquet, 2004. "On the equivalence between welfarism and equality of opportunity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 23(1), pages 127-147, August.
    3. Aaberge, Rolf & Mogstad, Magne & Peragine, Vito, 2011. "Measuring long-term inequality of opportunity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 193-204.
    4. Kranich, Laurence, 1996. "Equitable Opportunities: An Axiomatic Approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 131-147, October.
    5. Dirk Van de gaer & Marc Fleurbaey & Walter Bossert, 1999. "Responsibility, talent, and compensation: A second-best analysis," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 4(1), pages 35-55.
    6. Buchanan,James M. & Congleton,Roger D., 2006. "Politics by Principle, Not Interest," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521031325, January.
    7. Erwin Ooghe & Erik Schokkaert & Dirk gaer, 2007. "Equality of Opportunity versus Equality of Opportunity Sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(2), pages 209-230, February.
    8. Samuel Bowles & Glenn C. Loury & Rajiv Sethi, 2014. "Group Inequality," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 129-152, February.
    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. Kristof Bosmans & Z. Emel Öztürk, 2021. "Measurement of inequality of opportunity: A normative approach," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(2), pages 213-237, June.
    2. Francisco H. G. Ferreira & Vito Peragine, 2015. "Equality of opportunity: Theory and evidence," Working Papers 359, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    3. Marc Fleurbaey & Vito Peragine, 2013. "Ex Ante Versus Ex Post Equality of Opportunity," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(317), pages 118-130, January.
    4. Erwin Ooghe & Erik Schokkaert & Dirk gaer, 2007. "Equality of Opportunity versus Equality of Opportunity Sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(2), pages 209-230, February.
    5. X. Ramos & D. Van De Gaer, 2012. "Empirical Approaches to Inequality of Opportunity: Principles, Measures, and Evidence," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/792, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    6. Schokkaert, Erik & Van de gaer, Dirk & Vandenbroucke, Frank & Luttens, Roland Iwan, 2004. "Responsibility sensitive egalitarianism and optimal linear income taxation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 151-182, September.
    7. Tommy Andersson, 2008. "Non‐Linear Pricing And Equality Of Opportunity," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 541-556, November.
    8. François Maniquet, 2004. "On the equivalence between welfarism and equality of opportunity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 23(1), pages 127-147, August.
    9. Jacquet, Laurence & Van de Gaer, Dirk, 2011. "A comparison of optimal tax policies when compensation or responsibility matter," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1248-1262.
    10. Xavier Ramos & Dirk Van de gaer, 2021. "Is Inequality of Opportunity Robust to the Measurement Approach?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 67(1), pages 18-36, March.
    11. Donal O'Neill & Olive Sweetman & Dirk van de gaer, 1999. "Equality of Opportunity and Kernel Density Estimation: An Application to Intergenerational Mobility," Economics Department Working Paper Series n950999, Department of Economics, National University of Ireland - Maynooth.
    12. 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.
    13. John E. Roemer & Alain Trannoy, 2016. "Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Measurement," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1288-1332, December.
    14. Kristof Bosmans & Z. Emel Öztürk, 2022. "Equality and responsibility: ex ante and ex post redistribution mechanisms," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 73(4), pages 947-975, June.
    15. Kranich, Laurence, 1997. "Equalizing opportunities through public education when innate abilities are unobservable," UC3M Working papers. Economics 7216, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    16. 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.
    17. Vito Peragine & Laura Serlenga, 2008. "Higher education and equality of opportunity in Italy," Research on Economic Inequality, in: Inequality and Opportunity: Papers from the Second ECINEQ Society Meeting, pages 67-97, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    18. Vito Peragine & Ernesto Savaglio & Stefano Vannucci, 2008. "Poverty Rankings of Opportunity Profiles," Department of Economics University of Siena 548, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    19. Magali Jaoul-Grammare & Brice Magdalou, 2013. "Opportunities in Higher Education: An Application to France," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 111-112, pages 295-325.
    20. Roland Luttens & Dirk gaer, 2007. "Lorenz Dominance and Non-welfaristic Redistribution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(2), pages 281-302, February.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:cenwps:022011. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wffrede.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.