Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
Journal articles

Empirical welfare analysis: when preferences matter

Abstract : Abstract The conditional equality and egalitarian equivalence criteria were proposed by Fleurbaey (Fairness, responsibility, and welfare, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008) to provide better foundations to interpersonal comparisons in the context of heterogeneous preferences and multidimensional welfare. The first implementations of the egalitarian equivalence criterion follow an approach where the preferences are captured at the group level (based on socio-demographic variables) rather than at the individual level. Our contribution is to extend these models by using information on individual preferences, derived from the potential discrepancy between the group level optimal choice and the revealed choice of the individuals. We implement and compare the conditional equality and egalitarian equivalence criteria on a 2004 US microeconomic dataset and find that these criteria are relatively consistent in the identification of the worst-off. We also show that up to 18 % of the worst-off are no longer categorized as worst-off when the empirical approach accounts for individual preferences.
Complete list of metadatas

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01821127
Contributor : Jean-Francois Carpantier <>
Submitted on : Friday, June 22, 2018 - 12:09:31 PM
Last modification on : Saturday, June 23, 2018 - 1:21:25 AM

Identifiers

Collections

Citation

Jean-François Carpantier, Christelle Sapata. Empirical welfare analysis: when preferences matter. Social Choice and Welfare, Springer Verlag, 2016, 46 (3), pp.521-542. ⟨10.1007/s00355-016-0957-0⟩. ⟨hal-01821127⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

91