Ranking Income Distributions According to Equality of Opportunity

By V. Peragine. 2004

121 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cddc36314278088dacc41a9fb1c849aedc5592fe

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

1. John E. Roemer
2. Magne Mogstad
3. Gaston Yalonetzky
4. Daniele Checchi
5. V. Peragine
6. F. Waltenberg
7. Luis F. Gamboa
8. Alain Trannoy

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Gaston Yalonetzky
2. V. Peragine
3. F. Waltenberg
4. Luis F. Gamboa
5. John E. Roemer
6. Magne Mogstad
7. Alain Trannoy
8. Daniele Checchi

Citations in the corpus

• Inequality Of Opportunity And Growth (2013, unknown): “Castillo, 2003, Peragine, 2002 and 2004, Lefranc et al., 2006a and 2006b, Moreno-”
• Inequality of Opportunity in Brazil (2007, unknown): “In the words of Peragine (2004), “according to the opportunity egalitarian ethics, economic inequalities due to factors beyond the individual responsibility are inequitable and to be compensated by society, whereas inequalities due to personal responsibility are equitable and not to be compensated.””
• The Measurement of Inequality of Opportunity: Theory and an Application to Latin America (2008, unknown): “This is the view in Arneson (1989), Roemer (1998) and Peragine (2004), to mention but a few.”
• Measuring Long-Term Inequality of Opportunity (2011, methodology): “6 This is the approach proposed by Roemer (1993, 1998) and used by Roemer et al. (2003), Peragine (2004b), Aaberge and Colombino (2009) and Checchi and Peragine (2009) 4 cases, policies that minimize snapshots of opportunity inequality may deviate from those optimizing equality of opportunity in…”
• Measuring inequality of opportunity with imperfect data: the case of Turkey (2010, unknown): “Following Peragine [23], define the tranche p as the population subgroup that is homogeneous in the degree of effort spent.”
• A dissimilarity index of multidimensional inequality of opportunity (2010, background): “The desirable properties that indices of the types approach satisfy are discussed in Peragine (2004).”
• Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Measurement (2016, methodology): “Since effort measurement does not have the same robustness as circumstance measurement, choosing effort as the conditioning variable as in the tranche approach (see for instance Peragine 2004 and Peragine and Serlenga 2008) seems risky.”
• Inequality of opportunity in Italy (2010, background): “This ethical tension has been explored in depth by Fleurbaey [16] and Fleurbaey and Maniquet [18] in the context of fair division models and by Fleurbaey [17] in the context of welfare criteria, as Roemer [30], Van de gaer [32] and Peragine [25] criteria.”
• Inequality of opportunity in educational achievement in Latin America: Evidence (2011, methodology): “The one we adopt here has been developed in a series of papers by Vito Peragine and coauthors: Peragine (1999, 2002, 2004a, 2004b), Checchi, Peragine and Serlenga (2010), and Checchi and Peragine (2010).”
• Regional Disparities and Inequality of Opportunity: The Case of Italy (2005, methodology): “The model we use is taken from Peragine (2004b).”