File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Fairness and the Strengths of Agents' Claims

TitleFairness and the Strengths of Agents' Claims
Authors
Issue Date2016
Citation
Utilitas, 2016, v. 28, n. 3, p. 347-360 How to Cite?
AbstractJohn Broome has proposed a theory of fairness according to which fairness requires that agents' claims to goods be satisfied in proportion to the relative strength of those claims. In the case of competing claims for a single indivisible good, Broome argues that what fairness requires is the use of a weighted lottery as a surrogate to satisfying the competing claims: the relative chance of each claimant's winning the lottery should be set to the relative strength of each claimant's claim. In this journal, James Kirkpatrick and Nick Eastwood have objected that the use of weighted lotteries in the case of indivisible goods is unacceptable. In this article, I explain why Kirkpatrick and Eastwood's objection misses its mark.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/303474
ISSN
2022 Impact Factor: 0.9
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.451
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSharadin, Nathaniel-
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-15T08:25:23Z-
dc.date.available2021-09-15T08:25:23Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.citationUtilitas, 2016, v. 28, n. 3, p. 347-360-
dc.identifier.issn0953-8208-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/303474-
dc.description.abstractJohn Broome has proposed a theory of fairness according to which fairness requires that agents' claims to goods be satisfied in proportion to the relative strength of those claims. In the case of competing claims for a single indivisible good, Broome argues that what fairness requires is the use of a weighted lottery as a surrogate to satisfying the competing claims: the relative chance of each claimant's winning the lottery should be set to the relative strength of each claimant's claim. In this journal, James Kirkpatrick and Nick Eastwood have objected that the use of weighted lotteries in the case of indivisible goods is unacceptable. In this article, I explain why Kirkpatrick and Eastwood's objection misses its mark.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofUtilitas-
dc.titleFairness and the Strengths of Agents' Claims-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0953820815000527-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84955591293-
dc.identifier.volume28-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.spage347-
dc.identifier.epage360-
dc.identifier.eissn1741-6183-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000382375100006-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats