13 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Alexander W. Cappelen [9]A. W. Cappelen [2]A. Cappelen [2]
  1. A. Cappelen, E. Sørensen & B. Tungodden, Responsibility for What? Fairness and Individual Responsibility.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Alexander W. Cappelen & Bertil Tungodden (2013). Heterogeneity in Fairness Views: A Challenge to the Mutualistic Approach? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (1):84-85.
    This commentary argues that the observed heterogeneity in fairness views, documented in many economic experiments, poses a challenge to the partner choice theory developed by Baumard et al. It also discusses the extent to which their theory can explain how people consider inequalities due to pure luck.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. A. Cappelen, O. F. Norheim & B. Tungodden (2010). Disability Compensation and Responsibility. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 9 (4):411-427.
    It is a central political goal to secure disabled individuals the same opportunities as others to pursue their conception of a good life. This goal reflects an ambition to combine an egalitarian and a liberal moral intuition. In this article, we analyse how disabled individuals who take part in economic activity should be compensated in order to respect these two intuitions. The article asks how a system of disability compensation should be structured and what the level of such compensation should (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. A. W. Cappelen, O. F. Norheim & B. Tungodden (2008). Genomics and Equal Opportunity Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (5):361-364.
    Genomics provides information on genetic susceptibility to diseases and new possibilities for interventions which can fundamentally alter the design of fair health policies. The aim of this paper is to explore implications of genomics from the perspective of equal opportunity ethics. The ideal of equal opportunity requires that individuals are held responsible for some, but not all, factors that affect their health. Informational problems, however, often make it difficult to implement the ideal of equal opportunity in the context of healthcare. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Alexander W. Cappelen, Ole F. Norheim & Bertil Tungodden (2008). Genomics and Equal Opportunity Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (5):361-364.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Alexander W. Cappelen, Rune Jansen Hagen & and Bertil Tungodden (2007). National Responsibility and the Just Distribution of Debt Relief. Ethics and International Affairs 21 (1):69–83.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Alexander W. Cappelen, Rune Jansen Hagen & Bertil Tungodden (2007). National Responsibility and the Just Distribution of Debt Relief. Ethics and International Affairs 21 (s1):151-166.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Barry Herman, Sanjay G. Reddy, Jonathan Shafter, Alexander W. Cappelen, Rune Jansen Hagen, Bertil Tungodden, Kunibert Raffer, Elizabeth A. Donnelly & Thomas J. Trebat (2007). Carnegie Council. Ethics and International Affairs 21.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Alexander W. Cappelen & Bertil Tungodden (2006). A Liberal Egalitarian Paradox. Economics and Philosophy 22 (3):393-408.
    A liberal egalitarian theory of justice seeks to combine the values of equality, personal freedom, and personal responsibility. It is considered a much more promising position than strict egalitarianism, because it supposedly provides a fairness argument for inequalities reflecting differences in choice. However, we show that it is inherently difficult to fulfill this ambition. We present a liberal egalitarian paradox which shows that there does not exist any robust reward system that satisfies a minimal egalitarian and a minimal liberal requirement. (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Alexander W. Cappelen & Bertil Tungodden (2006). Relocating the Responsibility Cut: Should More Responsibility Imply Less Redistribution? Politics, Philosophy and Economics 5 (3):353-362.
    Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration and Chr. Michelsen Institute, Norway, bertil.tungodden{at}nhh.no ' + u + '@' + d + ' '//--> Liberal egalitarian theories of justice argue that inequalities arising from non-responsibility factors should be eliminated, but that inequalities arising from responsibility factors should be accepted. This article discusses how the fairness argument for redistribution within a liberal egalitarian framework is affected by a relocation of the cut between responsibility and non-responsibility factors. The article also discusses the claim (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. A. W. Cappelen (2005). Responsibility in Health Care: A Liberal Egalitarian Approach. Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (8):476-480.
    Lifestyle diseases constitute an increasing proportion of health problems and this trend is likely to continue. A better understanding of the responsibility argument is important for the assessment of policies aimed at meeting this challenge. Holding individuals accountable for their choices in the context of health care is, however, controversial. There are powerful arguments both for and against such policies. In this article the main arguments for and the traditional arguments against the use of individual responsibility as a criterion for (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Alexander W. Cappelen & Bertil Tungodden (2003). Reward and Responsibility: How Should We Be Affected When Others Change Their Effort? Politics, Philosophy and Economics 2 (2):191-211.
    University of Oslo and Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, Norway We look at how one should reward effort without rewarding talent. One way to approach this issue is to ask how an increase in one individual's effort should be allowed to affect the post-tax income of others. The article provides characterizations of three main classes of redistribution mechanism on the basis of how these answer this question. Key Words: reward • effort • responsibility • equal opportunity • distributive (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Alexander W. Cappelen (2001). The Moral Rationale for International Fiscal Law. Ethics and International Affairs 15 (1):97–110.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation