COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.49Keywords:
Allocative Justice, Democratic Equality, Luck Egalitarianism, Responsibility, Social JusticeAbstract
The concept of responsibility plays a crucial part in the debate between proponents of democratic equality, like Rawls, and defenders of luck egalitarianism, such as Dworkin. In this paper it is argued that the two theories can be combined, and that they should be combined to achieve a theory of justice that puts personal responsibility in its proper place. The concept of justice requires two different conceptions. The two theories can be combined because they deal with different problems of justice. They ought to be combined because, first, luck egalitarianism needs a theory of background justice, and second, a theory of justice must supply an answer to the question of just individual allocations, something that is not provided by democratic equality. Democratic equality and luck egalitarianism solve each other’s problems. The combined theory will lead to allocations of goods that respect both the difference principle and the envy test.
References
Anderson ES (1999) What Is the Point of Equality, Ethics 109:287-337 http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/233897?journalCode=et DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/233897
Arneson R (1989) Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare. Philosophical Studies 56:77-93 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00646210?LI=true DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00646210
Bolton GE, Ockenfels A (2000) ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition. American Economic Review 90:166-93 https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.90.1.166 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.1.166
Camerer C (2003) Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction. Princeton University Press, Princeton https://books.google.se/books?id=o7iRQTOe0AoC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Cappelen A, Hole AD, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2007) The Pluralism of Fairness Ideals: an Experimental Approach. American Economic Review 97:818-827 https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.97.3.818 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.3.818
Cappelen A, Erik. Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2010) Responsibility for what? Fairness and individual responsibility. European Economic Review 54: 429-441 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292109000890 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2009.08.005
Charness G, Rabin M (2002) Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests. Quarterly Journal of Economics 117:817-869 https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/117/3/817/1933015/Understanding-Social-Preferences-with-Simple-Tests DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/003355302760193904
Cohen GA (1989) On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice. Ethics 99:906-944 http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/293126?journalCode=et DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/293126
Dworkin R (1977) Taking Rights Seriously. Duckworth, London https://books.google.se/books?id=-HuwatdQKhgC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Dworkin R (1981) What is equality? Part 2: equality of resources. Philosophy and Public Affairs 10:283-345 http://www.jstor.org./stable/2265047
Dworkin R (2000) Sovereign Virtue – The Theory and Practice of Equality. Harvard University Press, Cambridge https://books.google.se/books?id=SIOPnqu3f5kC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 114:817-868 https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/114/3/817/1848113/A-Theory-of-Fairness-Competition-and-Cooperation DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/003355399556151
Hart HLA (1994) The Concept of Law, 2nd edition. Clarendon Press, Oxford https://books.google.se/books?id=hC0UDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Konow J (1996) A Positive Theory of Economic Fairness. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 31:13-35 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(96)00862-1
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268196008621?via%3
Dihub Konow J (2000) Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions. American Economic Review 90:1072-1091 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.4.1072
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.90.4.1072
Miller D (1999) Principles of Social Justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge https://books.google.se/books?id=y2wMzJtEZ_8C&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rawls J (1971) A Theory of Justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford https://books.google.se/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rawls J (1996) Political Liberalism, 2nd edition. Columbia University Press, New York https://books.google.se/books?id=vXGZRYCkaNsC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rawls J (2001) Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge https://books.google.se/books?id=AjrXZIlbK1cC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Roemer JE (1996) Theories of Distributive Justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge https://books.google.se/books?id=qQkX24xj9akC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Yaari ME, Bar-Hillel M (1984) On Dividing Justly. Social Choice and Welfare 1:1-24 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00297056?LI=true DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00297056
