Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T04:56:30.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ON SEVERAL APPROACHES TO EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2012

John E. Roemer
John E. Roemer*
Affiliation:
Yale University, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The formal theory of equality of opportunity emerged as a response – a friendly amendment – to Ronald Dworkin's (1981) characterization of resource egalitarianism, as defined by the allocation that would emerge from insurance contracts arrived at behind a thin veil of ignorance. This article compares several of the prominent versions of this response, put forth in the period 1993–2008. I argue that a generalization of Roemer's (1998) proposal is the most satisfactory approach. Inherent in that generalization is an indeterminism, which reflects a philosophical problem: that we do not know what comprise the ethically correct rewards to effort. The indeterminism should be resolved, I propose, by an ancillary theory which limits the degree of inequality which is acceptable.

Type
Articles
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 28 , Issue 2: Formal Ethics , July 2012 , pp. 165 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, E. 1999. What is the point of equality? Ethics 109: 287–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arneson, R. 1989. Equality and equality of opportunity for welfare. Philosophical Studies 56: 77–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betts, J. and Roemer, J., 2007. Equalizing opportunity for racial and socioeconomic groups in the United States through educational finance reform. In Schools and the Equal Opportunity Problem, ed. Peterson, P.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Björklund, A., Jantti, M. and Roemer, J.E. 2012. Equality of opportunity and the distribution of long-run income in Sweden. Social Choice & Welfare 39: 675–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calsamiglia, C. 2009. Decentralizing equality of opportunity. International Economic Review 50: 273–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, G.A. 1989. On the currency of egalitarian justice. Ethics 99: 906–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, G.A. 2007. Expensive tastes rides again. In Dworkin and his critics, ed. Burley, J.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cohen, G.A. 2009. Why not Socialism? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Dworkin, R. 1981. What is equality? Part 2: Equality of resources. Philosophy and Public Affairs 10: 283–345.Google Scholar
Fleurbaey, M. 2008. Fairness, Responsibility, and Welfare. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleurbaey, M. and Maniquet, F. 2010. Compensation and responsibility. In Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Vol. 2. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Fried, B. 1998. The Progressive Assault on Laissez-faire: Robert Hale and the First Law and Economics Movement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harsanyi, J. 1953. Cardinal utility in welfare economics and in the theory of risk-taking. Journal of Political Economy 61: 434–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harsanyi, J. 1955. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons, Journal of Political Economy 63: 309–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, A., Roemer, J. and Rosa, P. Dias 2011. Equalising opportunities in health through educational policy. Discussion paper, Dept. Political Science, Yale University.Google Scholar
Kolm, S-C. 2008. Reciprocity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Llavador, H. and Roemer, J. 2001. An equal-opportunity approach to the allocation of international aid. Journal of Development Economics 64: 147–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno-Ternero, J. and Roemer, J. 2008. The veil of ignorance violates priority. Economics and Philosophy 24: 233–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, J. 1985. Equality of talent. Economics and Philosophy 1: 151–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, J. 1993. A pragmatic theory of responsibility for the egalitarian planner. Philosophy and Public Affairs 22: 146–166.Google Scholar
Roemer, J. 1996. Theories of Distributive Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Roemer, J. 1998. Equality of Opportunity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, J. 2002. Egalitarianism against the veil of ignorance. Journal of Philosophy 99: 167–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, J. 2007. Equity in health care. Discussion paper, Dept. Political Science, Yale University.Google Scholar
Roemer, J. and Ünveren, B. 2012. Dynamic equality of opportunity. Discussion paper, Dept. Political Science, Yale University.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1980. Equality of what? In Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Vol. I, ed. McMurrin, S.. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Van de gaer, D. 1993. Equality of opportunity and investment in human capital. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Leuven.Google Scholar