Allocative Fairness
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 4079573 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Gil Hersch (0000-0003-0992-0164, Virginia Tech), Thomas Rowe (0009-0003-0518-7118, London School of Economics and Political Science) |
| Año | 2025 |
| Volumen | 20 |
| Número | 5 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2025-05-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Philosophy Compass (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 1747-9991 • E-ISSN: 1747-9991 |
| Editorial | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/phc3.70042 |
| OpenAlex | W4410700646 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Referencias citadas | 78 |
Questions of fair allocation arise regularly throughout our lives, ranging from the trivial to the significant, for governments, private companies, associations, families, and friends. This article discusses the nature of allocative fairness, which is focused on the fair distribution of divisible and indivisible goods. The recent literature on allocative fairness takes John Broome's discussion of fairness as the proportional treatment of claims as its starting point. On this view, a claim is a reason why an individual ought to receive a good. This article discusses the nature of allocative fairness, claims, and goods. The most prominent allocative procedures in the literature are discussed, including equal allocation, equitable allocation, markets, lotteries, and queues
Allocative efficiency · Economics · Microeconomics · Chemistry · Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Retributivism
Fair Division
The Luck of the Draw
Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions
Beyond Fairness and Deliberation
How Should We Aggregate Competing Claims?
To be fair
Egalitarianism Defended
Democratic Legitimacy
Democratic Procedures and Liberal Consensus
Fairness
Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy
V—Fairness
A Theory of Justice
Equality as Comparative Fairness
Inequality
Moral Aggregation
Justice, Equality, Fairness, Desert, Rights, Free Will, Responsibility, and Luck1
Against tiebreaking arguments in priority setting
How to be absolutely fair Part II
How to be absolutely fair Part I
Good reasons for losers
Procedural Fairness in Exchange Matching Systems
Fairness and close personal relationships
First Come, First Served
Weighing Up Weighted Lotteries
Weighted Lotteries and the Allocation of Scarce Medications for Covid‐19
Fairness Between Competing Claims
Perspectives on the Fairness of Lotteries
Why Lotteries Are Just
Egalitarianism and the Separateness of Persons
On Fairness and Claims
Aggregate Relevant Claims in Rescue Cases
Fairness and the Strengths of Agents’ Claims
Broome's Theory of Fairness and the Problem of Quantifying the Strengths of Claims
From Choice to Chance? Saving People, Fairness, and Lotteries
Kamm on Fairness
Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility
Cardinal Utility in Welfare Economics and in the Theory of Risk-taking
Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparison of Utility
Treating Broome Fairly
Needs, Moral Demands and Moral Theory
Broome on Fairness and Lotteries
Interpersonal comparisons of well-being
Saving Lives, Moral Theory, and the Claims of Individuals
Just lotteries
Three arguments for lotteries
| Velocidad de citación | historical |
|---|---|
| Altamente citado | No |