Welfarist evaluations of decision rules under interstate utility dependencies
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Choice and Welfare 34 (2):315-344 (2010)
We provide welfarist evaluations of decision rules for federations of states and consider models, under which the interests of people from different states are stochastically dependent. We concentrate on two welfarist standards; they require that the expected utility for the federation be maximized or that the expected utilities for people from different states be equal. We discuss an analytic result that characterizes the decision rule with maximum expected utility, set up a class of models that display interstate dependencies and run simulations for different dependency scenarios in the European Union. We find that, under positive correlations, the welfare distribution tends to be less sensitive to the choice of the decision rule, whereas it can be important under negative correlations. The results that Beisbart and Bovens (SCW 29, p. 581, 2007) have found for two types of models without interstate dependencies are relatively stable. There are exceptions, though, under which the way the welfare distribution is shaped by a decision rule is significantly affected by dependencies.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Ulrich Schmidt (2001). Lottery Dependent Utility: A Reexamination. Theory and Decision 50 (1):35-58.
Stephen A. Clark (2000). Revealed Preference and Expected Utility. Theory and Decision 49 (2):159-174.
Sharon Galbraith & Harriet Buckman Stephenson (1993). Decision Rules Used by Male and Female Business Students in Making Ethical Value Judgments: Another Look. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 12 (3):227 - 233.
Paul Weirich (1986). Expected Utility and Risk. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37 (4):419-442.
Teddy Seidenfeld, Extensions of Expected Utility Theory and Some Limitations of Pairwise Comparisons.
Claus Beisbart, Luc Bovens & Stephan Hartmann (2005). A Utilitarian Assessment of Alternative Decision Rules in the Council of Ministers. European Union Politics 6 (4):395-419.
Stephan Hartmann, Claus Beisbart & Luc Bovens (2005). A Utilitarian Assessment of Alternative Decision Rules in the Council of Ministers. European Union Politics 6 (4):395-419.
Stephan Hartmann & C. Beisbart (2006). Welfarism and the Assessments of Social Decision Rules. In Ulle Endriss (ed.), Computational Social Choice 2006.
Claus Beisbart & Stephan Hartmann (2006). Welfarism and the Assessment of Social Decision Rules. In Jerome Lang & Ulle Endriss (eds.), Computational Social Choice 2006. University of Amsterdam
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads37 ( #113,411 of 1,911,611 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #179,609 of 1,911,611 )
How can I increase my downloads?