Equality of Opportunity
By John E. Roemer. 1998
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Gustavo A. Marrero
- Alexander W. Cappelen
- V. Peragine
- Daniele Checchi
- Xavier Ramos
- P. Brunori
- Olof Johansson-Stenman
- Branko Milanovic
Citations in the corpus
- Workplace Training in Europe (2005, unknown): “Following Roemer, 1998, equal opportunity policies need to distinguish between differences in outcomes that arise from different individual expenditure of effort and differences arising from circumstances for which society believe individuals should not be held accountable – such as race, gender,…”
- Equity and Development (2006, background): “I will not discuss how we measure the distance between advantage distribution functions (for that, see Roemer [12, 13]); there are a number of possibilities.”
- Kantian optimization: A microfoundation for cooperation (2015, background): “The extensive literature in nonwelfarist theories of justice could be brought to bear (see Roemer, 1998; Fleurbaey, 2008).”
- Intergenerational Earnings Mobility among the Children of Canadian Immigrants (2009, background): “Roemer (2004, 1998) cautions that estimates of regression to the mean models should not be taken as indicators of equality of opportunity because parents influence their children through a hierarchy of circumstances.”
- Inequality and Trust: New Evidence from Panel Data (2016, unknown): “It is worth noting that there is a latent difference between inequality of opportunity and intergenerational mobility, as the latter may also reflect preferences or other factors for which the individual can be held responsible (Swift, 2004; Roemer, 1998 and 2002).”
- Capabilities, Functionings and Refined Functionings (2006, unknown): “1 See Arneson (1989, 1990), Cohen (1989, 1990), Dworkin (2000), Rawls (1971, 1982), Roemer (1998), Sen (1987, 1992) and van Parijs (1995).”
- Inequality of opportunity in Italy (2010, methodology): “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.”