Equity versus equality: Spectators, stakeholders and groups

被引:16
|
作者
Konow, James [1 ,2 ]
Saijo, Tatsuyoshi [3 ]
Akai, Kenju [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Kiel, Chair Econ & Eth, Kiel, Germany
[2] Loyola Marymt Univ, Dept Econ, One LMU Dr,Suite 4200, Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[3] Kochi Univ Technol, Res Inst Future Design, Kochi, Japan
[4] Shimane Univ, Ctr Community Based Healthcare Res & Educ, Matsue, Shimane, Japan
关键词
Decision making for others; In-groups; Equity; Equality; Fairness; Real effort task; SOCIAL PREFERENCES; FAIRNESS; ALLOCATION; CLAIMS; RECIPROCITY; EFFICIENCY; NORMS; GAMES;
D O I
10.1016/j.joep.2019.05.001
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Justice figures prominently in a wide variety of economically important contexts that involve both third parties and involved parties, e.g., in environmental regulation, international trade, and legal proceedings. The primary rivals for fairness rules over the distribution of a fixed good are equality and equity (i.e., allocations that are proportional to contributions). This paper reports the results of a dictator experiment in relation to a large variety of factors that might affect these rules, including performance on a real effort task, in-group identity, subject pools, allocative power, cultural orientation and demographic variables. We find impersonal third parties (i.e., Spectators) allocating anonymously for others favor equity. Subjects who share personal stakes anonymously with recipients (i.e., Stakeholders) allocate amounts between equity and equality. Stakeholders, who meet and communicate with their recipients (i.e., In-groups), allocate even more equally than anonymous stakeholders to their own recipients and behave more selfishly toward other subjects (i.e., Out-groups). These findings are robust with respect to subject pool, a measure of culture, and demographic variables, which seldom matter. We conclude that there is considerable agreement about these fairness rules, when parties are well informed, although there remain important differences across subject pools in the willingness to act on those rules.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Equality, Equity, and Algorithms: Learning from Justice Rosalie Abella&DAG;
    Minow, Martha
    UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LAW JOURNAL, 2023, : 163 - 178
  • [42] Solving the equity-equality conceptual dilemma: a new model for analysis of the educational process
    Espinoza, Oscar
    EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, 2007, 49 (04) : 343 - 363
  • [43] Burnout through the Lenses of Equity/Equality, Diversity and Inclusion and Disabled People: A Scoping Review
    Wolbring, Gregor
    Lillywhite, Aspen
    SOCIETIES, 2023, 13 (05):
  • [44] Equity not equality: the undocumented migrant child's opportunity to access education in South Africa
    Blessed-Sayah, Sarah
    Griffiths, Dominic
    EDUCATIONAL REVIEW, 2024, 76 (01) : 46 - 68
  • [45] Promoting equity and equality in student learning: principals as social justice leaders in Kuwaiti schools
    Alajmi, Munirah
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT, 2024,
  • [46] Quality versus equality? Liberal and deliberative ideals of political equality
    Schaal, Gary S.
    Heidenreich, Felix
    OSTERREICHISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR POLITIKWISSENSCHAFT, 2007, 36 (01): : 23 - +
  • [47] Equality versus self-interest in the brain: Differential roles of anterior insula and medial prefrontal cortex
    Civai, Claudia
    Crescentini, Cristiano
    Rustichini, Aldo
    Rumiati, Raffaella Ida
    NEUROIMAGE, 2012, 62 (01) : 102 - 112
  • [48] Equality of Opportunity in Higher Education: A debate about the Equity Priority Access System at University of Chile
    Westwood, Pablo Aguayo
    REVISTA DE PEDAGOGIA UNIVERSITARIA Y DIDACTICA DEL DERECHO, 2016, 3 (01): : 62 - 73
  • [49] Implementing Equity and Equality at the Frontline in Two Contrasting Welfare-To-Work (WTW) Organizations in California
    Stamm, Lucia Marina Lanfranconi
    Basaran, Ayda
    HUMAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE, 2023, 47 (01) : 57 - 75
  • [50] Equality, equity, diversity, and inclusion principles: how should we apply these to statistical methodology research?
    Ellesha Smith
    Carol Akroyd
    Rebecca Barnes
    Emma Beeston
    Jonathan Broomfield
    Sylwia Bujkiewicz
    Natalie Darko
    Christopher Newby
    Mark J. Rutherford
    Aiden Smith
    Rachael Stannard
    Freya Tyrer
    Laura J. Gray
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 25 (1)