Book contents
- Prioritarianism in Practice
- Prioritarianism in Practice
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- List of Contributors
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Theory of Prioritarianism
- 3 Well-Being Measurement
- 4 Prioritarianism and Optimal Taxation
- 5 Prioritarianism and Measuring Social Progress
- 6 Prioritarianism and Health Policy
- 7 Prioritarianism and Fatality Risk Regulation
- 8 Prioritarianism and Climate Change
- 9 Prioritarianism and Education
- 10 Empirical Research on Ethical Preferences: How Popular is Prioritarianism?
- 11 Prioritarianism and Equality of Opportunity
- 12 Prioritarianism and the COVID-19 Pandemic
- Index
- References
5 - Prioritarianism and Measuring Social Progress
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 June 2022
Book contents
- Prioritarianism in Practice
- Prioritarianism in Practice
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- List of Contributors
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Theory of Prioritarianism
- 3 Well-Being Measurement
- 4 Prioritarianism and Optimal Taxation
- 5 Prioritarianism and Measuring Social Progress
- 6 Prioritarianism and Health Policy
- 7 Prioritarianism and Fatality Risk Regulation
- 8 Prioritarianism and Climate Change
- 9 Prioritarianism and Education
- 10 Empirical Research on Ethical Preferences: How Popular is Prioritarianism?
- 11 Prioritarianism and Equality of Opportunity
- 12 Prioritarianism and the COVID-19 Pandemic
- Index
- References
Summary
In this chapter, we provide a critical review of the literature on social progress from a prioritarian perspective. We give special attention to the choice of the measure of individual well-being and the aggregation method across individuals in our discussion of various methods that have been proposed in the literature. We present the “growth incidence curve” as a useful device to chart social progress. We illustrate with empirical results for Russia in the period 1995–2005.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Prioritarianism in Practice , pp. 204 - 259Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Adler, M. D. (2012). Well-Being and Fair Distribution: Beyond Cost-Benefit Analysis. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Adler, M. D. (2016). “Extended Preferences.” In Adler, M. and Fleurbaey, M., eds., Oxford Handbook on Well-being and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, pp. 476–517.Google Scholar
Alkire, S. and Foster, J. (2010). “Designing the inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (HDI)” Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative Working Paper 37.Google Scholar
Angelini, V., Cavapozzi, D., Corazzini, L. and Paccagnella, O. (2014). “Do Danes and Italians rate life satisfaction in the same way? Using vignettes to correct for individual-specific scale biases.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 76: 643–666.Google Scholar
Atkinson, A.B. (1970). “On the measurement of inequality.” Journal of Economic Theory, 2: 244–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, A.B., Cantillon, B., Marlier, E. and Nolan, B. (2002). Social Indicators: The EU and Social Exclusion. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, G.S., Philipson, T.J. and Soares, R.R. (2005). “The quantity and quality of life and the evolution of world inequality.” The American Economic Review, 95: 277–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beegle, K., Himelein, K. and Ravallion, M. (2012). “Frame-of-reference bias in subjective welfare.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 81: 556–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackorby, C., Bossert, W. and Donaldson, D. J. (2005). Population Issues in Social Choice Theory, Welfare Economics, and Ethics. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosmans, K., Decancq, K. and Ooghe, E. (2015). “What do normative indices of multidimensional inequality really measure?” Journal of Public Economics, 130: 94–104.Google Scholar
Bossert, W. and Dutta, B. (2019). “The measurement of welfare change.” Social Choice and Welfare, 53: 603–619.Google Scholar
Chiappori, P.A. and Meghir, C. (2015). “Intra-household Inequality.” In Atkinson, A. B. and Bourguignon, F., eds., Handbook of Income Distribution, Elsevier, pp. 1369–1418.Google Scholar
Deaton, A. (1979). “The distance function in consumer behaviour with applications to index numbers and optimal taxation.” The Review of Economic Studies, 46: 391–405.Google Scholar
Deaton, A. (1980). “The measurement of welfare: theory and practical guidelines” , Living Standards Measurement Study Working Paper No. 7, World Bank.Google Scholar
Deaton, A. and Muellbauer, J. (1980). Economics and Consumer Behavior. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Decancq, K. (2017). “Measuring multidimensional inequality in the OECD Member Countries with a distribution-sensitive Better Life Index.” Social Indicators Research, 131: 1057–1086.Google Scholar
Decancq, K., Fleurbaey, M. and Maniquet, F. (2019) “Multidimensional poverty measurement with individual preferences.” The Journal of Economic Inequality, 17: 29–49.Google Scholar
Decancq, K., Fleurbaey, M. and Schokkaert, E. (2015a). “Inequality, Income, and Well-Being.” In Atkinson, A.B. and Bourguignon, F., eds., Handbook of Income Distribution, Elsevier, pp. 67–140.Google Scholar
Decancq, K., Fleurbaey, M. and Schokkaert, E. (2015b). “Happiness, equivalent incomes, and respect for individual preferences.” Economica, 82: 1082–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decancq, K., Fleurbaey, M. and Schokkaert, E. (2017). “Well-being inequality and preference heterogeneity.” Economica, 84: 210–238.Google Scholar
Decancq, K. and Lugo, M.A. (2013). “Weights in multidimensional indices of well-being: An overview.” Econometric Reviews, 32: 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decancq, K. and Neumann, D. (2016). “Does the choice of well-being measure matter empirically?” In Adler, M.D. and Fleurbaey, M., eds., Oxford Handbook on Well-being and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, pp. 553–587.Google Scholar
Decancq, K. and Ooghe, E. (2010). “Has the world moved forward? A robust multidimensional evaluation.” Economics Letters, 107: 266–269.Google Scholar
Decancq, K. and Schokkaert, E. (2016). “Beyond GDP: Using equivalent incomes to measure well-being in Europe.” Social Indicators Research, 126: 21–55.Google Scholar
Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., Schupp, J. and Wagner, G. G. (2011). “Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences.” Journal of the European Economic Association, 9: 522–550.Google Scholar
Dutta, I. and Foster, J. (2013). “Inequality of Happiness in the US: 1972–2010.” The Review of Income and Wealth, 59: 393–415.Google Scholar
Dworkin, R. (1981). “What is equality? Part 1: Equality of welfare.’’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 10: 185–246.Google Scholar
Ferreira, F.H.G. (2012). “Distributions in motion: Economic growth, inequality, and poverty dynamics”. In Jefferson, P., ed., Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Poverty, Oxford University Press, pp. 427–462.Google Scholar
Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. and Frijters, P. (2004). “How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness?” Economic Journal, 114: 641–659.Google Scholar
Fleurbaey, M. (2009). “Beyond GDP: the quest for a measure of social welfare.” Journal of Economic Literature, 47: 1029–1075.Google Scholar
Fleurbaey, M. and Blanchet, D. (2013). Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleurbaey, M. and Gaulier, G. (2009). “International comparisons of living standards by equivalent incomes.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 111: 597–624.Google Scholar
Fleurbaey, M., Luchini, S., Muller, C. and Schokkaert, E. (2013). “Equivalent income and fair evaluation of health care.” Health Economics, 22: 711–729.Google Scholar
Fleurbaey, M. and Maniquet, F. (2011). A Theory of Fairness and Social Welfare. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fleurbaey, M. and Tadenuma, K. (2014). “Universal social orderings: An integrated theory of policy evaluation, inter-society comparisons, and interpersonal comparisons.” The Review of Economic Studies, 81: 1071–1101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, J., Lopez-Calva, L.F. and Szekely, M. (2005). “Measuring the distribution of human development: Methodology and an application to Mexico.” Journal of Human Development, 6: 5–25.Google Scholar
Genicot, G. and Ray, D. (2013). “Measuring upward mobility.” Unpublished paper, Georgetown University and New York University.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J. C. (1977). “Morality and the theory of rational behavior.” Social Research, 44: 623–656.Google Scholar
Helliwell, J., Layard, R., Sachs, J. and Neve, J.-E.D. (2019). World Happiness Report 2019. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.Google Scholar
Jones, C. I. and Klenow, P. J. (2016). “Beyond GDP? Welfare across countries and time.” The American Economic Review, 106: 2426–2457.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, D.W. (1990). “Aggregate Consumer Behavior and the measurement of social welfare.” Econometrica, 58: 1007–1040.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, D.W. (2018). “Production and welfare: Progress in economic measurement.” Journal of Economic Literature, 56: 867–919.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, D.W. and Schreyer, P. (2017). “Measuring individual economic well-being and social welfare within the framework of the system of national accounts.” The Review of Income and Wealth, 63: S460–S477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jorgenson, D.W. and Slesnick, D.T. (2014). “Measuring Social Welfare in the U.S. National Accounts.” In Jorgenson, D.W., Landefeld, J.S. and Schreyer, P., eds., Measuring Economic Sustainability and Progress, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
King, G., Murray, C.J.L., Salomon, J.A. and Tandon, A. (2004). “Enhancing the validity and cross-cultural comparability of measurement in survey research.” The American Political Science Review, 98: 191–207.Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-C. (1976). “Unequal inequalities. I.” Journal of Economic Theory, 12: 416–442.Google Scholar
Kraay, A. (2006). “When is growth pro-poor? Evidence from a panel of countries.” Journal of Development Economics, 80: 198–227.Google Scholar
Lakner, C. and Milanovic, B. (2016). “Global income distribution: From the fall of the Berlin Wall to the Great Recession.” World Bank Economic Review, 30: 203–232.Google Scholar
Milanovic, B. (2016). Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pollak, R. A. (1971). “Additive utility functions and linear Engel curves.” The Review of Economic Studies, 38: 401–414.Google Scholar
Ponthière, G. (2016). “Lifetime Well-Being.” In Adler, M. and Fleurbaey, M., eds., Oxford handbook on Well-being and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, pp. 871–900.Google Scholar
Ravallion, M. (2011). “Mashup indices of development.” The World Bank Research Observer, 27: 1–32.Google Scholar
Ravallion, M. and Chen, S. (2003). “Measuring pro-poor growth.” Economics Letters, 78: 93–99.Google Scholar
Ravallion, M., Himelein, K. and Beegle, K. (2016). “Can Subjective Questions on Economic Welfare Be Trusted?” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 64: 697–726.Google Scholar
Sen, A.K. (1979). “The welfare basis of real income comparisons: A survey.” Journal of Economic Literature, 17: 1–45.Google Scholar
Slesnick, D.T. (1998). “Empirical approaches to the measurement of welfare.” Journal of Economic Literature, 36: 2108–2165.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J.E., Sen, A. and Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). “Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.” Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, Paris.Google Scholar
Tsui, K.Y. (1995). “Multidimensional generalizations of the relative and absolute inequality indices: the Atkinson-Kolm-Sen approach.” Journal of Economic Theory, 67: 251–265.Google Scholar
Weymark, J.A. (2006). “The normative approach to the measurement of multidimensional inequality.” In Farina, F. and Savaglio, E., eds., Inequality and Economic Integration, Routledge, London, pp. 3101–3335.Google Scholar