Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T12:07:51.713Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

L'Égalité de la liberté

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

Serge-Christophe Kolm
Serge-Christophe Kolm*
Affiliation:
École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
Get access

Résumé

Le fait qu'aucun individu ne préfère l'allocation d'un autre à la sienne propre est identique à l'égalité de la liberté qui est —en un sens large — la forme nécessaire de la justice dans la société. Cet article montre les propriétés et sens principaux de ce critère et les développements centraux auxquels il a conduit.

Summary

Summary

No individual preferring any other's allocation to his own is identical to equality of liberty that is —understood in a large sense— the necessary form of justice in society. This paper shows the main properties and senses of this criterion and the central developments it led to.

Keywords

D63D63
Type
Research Article
Information
Recherches Économiques de Louvain/ Louvain Economic Review , Volume 60 , Issue 1 , March 1994 , pp. 81 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 1994 

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

BIBLIOGRAPHIE

Golman, et Sussangkarn, [1983], Dealing with Envy, Journal of Public Economies, vol. 22, pp. 203–112.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J., [1953], Cardinal Welfare in Welfare Economies and in the Thory of Risk-taking, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 61. pp. 434–435.Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1966], The Optimal Production of Social Justice, IEA Conference On Public Economies (Proceedings : Guitton, H. et Margolis, J., éds, Economie Publique, 1968, Paris CNRS).Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1971a], Justice et Equité, CEPREMAP, Paris (réimpression : 1972, CNRS, Paris).Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1971b], La taxation de la consommation ostentatoire, Revue d'Economie Politique, vol. 1.Google Scholar
kolm, S.-Ch. [1974], Super-équité, Kyklos, vol. 26(4).Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1987], Adequation, Equity and Fundamental Analysis, CERAS N° 59.Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1990a], The General Theory of Justice, Paris, CERAS.Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1990b], The normative economics of unanimity and equality: equity, adequacy and fundamental dominance with application to matehings and wages, in Social Choice, Justice and Voting, éd. par, K. J. Arrow, London, Mac Millan.Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1991a], The Ethical Economics of Envy, Paris, CERAS N° 90.Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1991b], Super-Equity, Paris, CERAS N° 98.Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1991c], Philosophical Reasons for Equity, Paris, CERAS N° 99.Google Scholar
Kolm, S.-Ch. [1993], Efficient Economic Justice, CGPC.Google Scholar
Kolm, S. Ch. [1994], The Meaning of Fundamental Preferences, Social Choice and Welfare, march.Google Scholar
Mishan, E.J. [1960], A Survey of Welfare Economics, 1939-1959, The Economic Journal, vol. 70.Google Scholar
Tlnbergen, J. [1946], Redelijke Inkomensverdeling, Haarlem, De Gulden Pers.Google Scholar
Tobin, J. [1970], On Limiting the Domain of inequality, Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 13, pp. 363–378.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. [1983], Spheres of Justice, Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar