Abstract

We present the results of a questionnaire study in Belgium, Burkina Faso and Indonesia focusing on the problem of the just allocation of an indivisible good. The formal axioms proposed in social choice theory are helpful in structuring the response patterns. Interindividual differences can be interpreted in a meaningful way in terms of basic intuitions about desert, efficiency and compensation. Belgian students are most resourceegalitarian, Burkinese students attach a large weight to innate capacities, Indonesian students focus on actual production. The crucial no-envy criterion is supported by a majority of respondents, but this majority becomes small if there is an unavoidable conflict between no-envy and the responsibility requirement of the stand-alone upper bound.

Highlights

  • Questionnaire researchhas overthe past years gained a properplace within normative economics1

  • We could even hypothesize a possible refinement: the relative popularity of NO ENVY (NE) and STAND-ALONE UPPER BOUND (SAUB) suggests that the Indonesian students give a larger weight to actual production, while the Burkinese students look at potential productivity

  • 11 This is consistent with our earlier finding that the Indonesian sample gives a larger weight to dierences in actual production

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Questionnaire researchhas overthe past years gained a properplace within normative economics. The arguments being used" and that survey research can never be a substitute for careful economic thinking, we still feel that it is useful to investigate what are the prevailing opinions in society and how they relate to economic theory. A second approach could be called the "axiom acceptance research" It starts from a specific theoretical problem originating from philosophical or economic discourse and examines the acceptance of the related formal axioms proposed in the literature. These formal axioms are translated and incorporated into (hypothetical) cases that are more or less close to everyday life situations and respondents are asked to answer either numerical or verbal questions or both.

The problem and some axioms2
Some rules
A broader interpretation
Empirical setting
Results: allocating an indivisible good
A qualification:the results for the verbal questions
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call