On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice

By J. Jenkins. 2012

620 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

Causal Reasoning for Algorithmic Fairness (2018, background): “Terminology varies, but many of their central questions and ideas, such as the role of agency in justice, responsibility-sensitive egalitarianism, and luck egalitarianism [10, 13, 31] involve causal reasoning.”
Fairness in Machine Learning: Lessons from Political Philosophy (2017, background): “Egalitar-ians have articulated various competing views, including welfare, understood in terms of pleasure or preference-satisfaction Cohen (1989); resources such as income and assets Rawls (2009); Dworkin (1981); or capabilities, understood as both the ability and resources necessary to do certain…”
Compensation and responsibility (2011, background): “The fourth source of inspiration was the Rawlsian tradition in political philosophy, initiated by Rawls (1971) and developed by Dworkin (1981a,b), Sen (1985), Arneson (1989), Cohen (1989) and van Parijs (1995), and also commented upon by Roemer (1985a, 1986).”
Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Measurement (2016, neutral): “Some main philosophical contributions to the discussion were, following Rawls, from Sen (1980), Dworkin (1981a, 1981b), Arneson (1989), and Cohen (1989). Although the philosophical literature generated by these pioneers is too large to list here, other book-length treatments that deserve mention inc”
Measuring inequality of opportunity with imperfect data: the case of Turkey (2010, positive): “An important strand of this thinking has argued that equality of opportunity provides the appropriate “currency of egalitarian justice” (Cohen, 1989).”
When Bad Things Happen to Good People Luck Egalitarianism and Costly Rescues (2016, background): “6 We thus endorse Cohen’s pluralism about moral value (Cohen 2008, 2–3; Cohen 1989, 910–912; Cohen 2011, 125), and disagree with Dworkin’s monism (Dworkin 2011). distributive justice is not always a decisive reason for action (Cohen 2008, 381).”
Two types of ‘enough’: sufficiency as minimum and maximum (2016, background): “This question has been debated extensively within the egalitarian debate among justice theorists in the 1980s (e.g. Sen 1979, Dworkin 1981a, 1981b, Cohen 1989).”
Inequality of Opportunity in Europe (2012, methodology): “Roemer (1993, 1998) brings that philosophical debate into economics and formalizes a precise definition of equality of opportunity (see also Van de Gaer, 1993). He emphasizes that an individual’s outcome (income, welfare, health, etc.) is a function of variables within and beyond the individual’s co”
Fair Allocation Rules (2011, background): “The debate about which variables one should focus on when discussing fairness (resources, welfares, utilities, opportunities, functionings) has involved many writers (Dworkin, 1981a,b; Cohen, 1989, 1990; Sen, 1970; Roemer, 1996).”
Ex ante versus ex post equality of opportunity (2013, background): “Book-length collections of empirical analyses of equality of opportunity in developing countries can be found in World Bank (2006) and de Barros et al. (2009).”