Equity versus equality: Spectators, stakeholders and groups

被引:15
|
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
  • [1] Equity versus equality in allocations to adults and children
    Wagstaff, GF
    JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1997, 137 (04): : 445 - 448
  • [2] Equality versus Equity: A New Perspective on an Intractable Problem
    Holley, Robert P.
    JOURNAL OF LIBRARY ADMINISTRATION, 2022, 62 (07) : 963 - 972
  • [3] EQUALITY AND EQUITY
    BRONFENBRENNER, M
    ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, 1973, 409 (SEP): : 9 - 23
  • [4] EQUALITY AS EQUITY
    GINSBURG, RB
    AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 1972, 58 (NOV): : 1138 - &
  • [5] Equity equality
    Langeler, G
    FORBES, 2000, 165 (13): : 32 - 32
  • [6] EQUITY OR EQUALITY
    SHAW, AB
    JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS OF LONDON, 1995, 29 (04): : 369 - 370
  • [7] EQUITY OR EQUALITY
    EVANS, JG
    JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS OF LONDON, 1995, 29 (03): : 186 - 187
  • [8] EQUITY, EQUALITY AND WELFARE
    LAMBERT, PJ
    YITZHAKI, S
    EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 1995, 39 (3-4) : 674 - 682
  • [9] EQUITY, EQUALITY, AND MARRIAGE
    PETERSON, C
    JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1981, 113 (02): : 283 - 284
  • [10] FROM EQUALITY TO EQUITY
    MATEJU, P
    VLACHOVA, K
    SOCIOLOGICKY CASOPIS, 1995, 31 (02): : 215 - 239