Presentation at the HLEG thematic workshop on "Inequality of Opportunity", 14 January 2015, Paris, France, http://oe.cd/HLEG-workshop-inequality-opportunity-2015
HLEG thematic workshop on "Inequality of Opportunity", Miles CorakStatsCommunications
Presentation at the HLEG thematic workshop on "Inequality of Opportunity", 14 January 2015, Paris, France, http://oe.cd/HLEG-workshop-inequality-opportunity-2015
The Problem with dots: A critique of the Lessig and Murray modelsmrleiser
My presentation to the Information Technology Law students of the LSE on regulatory theory of the Internet. We touch on Lessig, Murray, rationality, pathetic dots, network communitarianism and big data.
Collaborating for Equity and Justice: Moving Beyond Collective ImpactJim Bloyd, DrPH, MPH
By ARTHUR T. HIMMELMAN, BILL BERKOWITZ, BRIAN D. CHRISTENS, FRANCES DUNN BUTTERFOSS, KIEN S. LEE, LINDA BOWEN, MEREDITH MINKLER, SUSAN M. WOLFE, TOM WOLFF AND VINCENT T. FRANCISCO | January 9, 2017 Non-Profit Quarterly
The United States has historically struggled with how to treat all its citizens equitably and fairly while wealth and power are concentrated in a very small segment of our society. Now, in the face of growing public awareness and outcry about the centuries-long injustices experienced by African Americans, Native Americans, new immigrants, and other marginalized groups, we believe that our nation urgently needs collaborative multisector approaches toward equity and justice. For maximum effectiveness, these approaches must include and prioritize leadership by those most affected by injustice and inequity in order to effect structural and systemic changes that can support and sustain inclusive and healthy communities. Traditional community organizing and working for policy change will supplement the collaborative approach. We believe that efforts that do not start with treating community leaders and residents as equal partners cannot later be reengineered to meaningfully share power. In short, coalitions and collaborations need a new way of engaging with communities that leads to transformative changes in power, equity, and justice.
This document discusses research design and the differences between descriptive and explanatory research.
Descriptive research aims to describe what is happening, while explanatory research aims to explain why something is happening. Good description is needed to identify phenomena that require explanation. However, description alone does not prove causation.
Explanatory research develops causal explanations by collecting information to test hypotheses about why outcomes occur. Causation involves more than just correlation - two variables can be correlated without one causing the other. Research design aims to avoid making invalid causal inferences and distinguish correlation from causation. Causation can be thought of deterministically, where one variable invariably produces an outcome, or probabilistically, where one variable increases the chances of an outcome.
This document discusses research design and the differences between descriptive and explanatory research.
Descriptive research aims to describe what is happening, while explanatory research aims to explain why something is happening. Good description is needed to identify phenomena that require explanation. However, description alone does not prove causation.
Explanatory research develops causal explanations by collecting information to test hypotheses about why outcomes occur. Causation involves more than just correlation - two variables can be correlated without one causing the other. Research design aims to avoid making invalid causal inferences and distinguish correlation from causation. Causation can be thought of deterministically, where one variable invariably produces an outcome, or probabilistically, where one variable increases the chances of an outcome.
Agent-Based Modelling and Microsimulation: Ne’er the Twain Shall Meet? Edmund Chattoe-Brown
This presentation considers the differences in approach between ABM and microsimulation and considers the extent to which the two approaches might be reconciled.
“Great leaders do both,” Cliff said during the session. “Every strength taken to an extreme becomes a weakness.” Polarity thinking, both men said, gives systems thinking a theory, process, or tool that lets us tap into the thinking of each side in order to minimize the fear that each one may conjure up.Nov 7, 2011
Complex Adaptive Systems and International Security AnalysisNKHAYDEN
Overview of how various USG agencies use CAS concepts for analysis of international security problems. Presented as a university seminar to graduate students in international security policy studies at University of Maryland
HLEG thematic workshop on "Inequality of Opportunity", Miles CorakStatsCommunications
Presentation at the HLEG thematic workshop on "Inequality of Opportunity", 14 January 2015, Paris, France, http://oe.cd/HLEG-workshop-inequality-opportunity-2015
The Problem with dots: A critique of the Lessig and Murray modelsmrleiser
My presentation to the Information Technology Law students of the LSE on regulatory theory of the Internet. We touch on Lessig, Murray, rationality, pathetic dots, network communitarianism and big data.
Collaborating for Equity and Justice: Moving Beyond Collective ImpactJim Bloyd, DrPH, MPH
By ARTHUR T. HIMMELMAN, BILL BERKOWITZ, BRIAN D. CHRISTENS, FRANCES DUNN BUTTERFOSS, KIEN S. LEE, LINDA BOWEN, MEREDITH MINKLER, SUSAN M. WOLFE, TOM WOLFF AND VINCENT T. FRANCISCO | January 9, 2017 Non-Profit Quarterly
The United States has historically struggled with how to treat all its citizens equitably and fairly while wealth and power are concentrated in a very small segment of our society. Now, in the face of growing public awareness and outcry about the centuries-long injustices experienced by African Americans, Native Americans, new immigrants, and other marginalized groups, we believe that our nation urgently needs collaborative multisector approaches toward equity and justice. For maximum effectiveness, these approaches must include and prioritize leadership by those most affected by injustice and inequity in order to effect structural and systemic changes that can support and sustain inclusive and healthy communities. Traditional community organizing and working for policy change will supplement the collaborative approach. We believe that efforts that do not start with treating community leaders and residents as equal partners cannot later be reengineered to meaningfully share power. In short, coalitions and collaborations need a new way of engaging with communities that leads to transformative changes in power, equity, and justice.
This document discusses research design and the differences between descriptive and explanatory research.
Descriptive research aims to describe what is happening, while explanatory research aims to explain why something is happening. Good description is needed to identify phenomena that require explanation. However, description alone does not prove causation.
Explanatory research develops causal explanations by collecting information to test hypotheses about why outcomes occur. Causation involves more than just correlation - two variables can be correlated without one causing the other. Research design aims to avoid making invalid causal inferences and distinguish correlation from causation. Causation can be thought of deterministically, where one variable invariably produces an outcome, or probabilistically, where one variable increases the chances of an outcome.
This document discusses research design and the differences between descriptive and explanatory research.
Descriptive research aims to describe what is happening, while explanatory research aims to explain why something is happening. Good description is needed to identify phenomena that require explanation. However, description alone does not prove causation.
Explanatory research develops causal explanations by collecting information to test hypotheses about why outcomes occur. Causation involves more than just correlation - two variables can be correlated without one causing the other. Research design aims to avoid making invalid causal inferences and distinguish correlation from causation. Causation can be thought of deterministically, where one variable invariably produces an outcome, or probabilistically, where one variable increases the chances of an outcome.
Agent-Based Modelling and Microsimulation: Ne’er the Twain Shall Meet? Edmund Chattoe-Brown
This presentation considers the differences in approach between ABM and microsimulation and considers the extent to which the two approaches might be reconciled.
“Great leaders do both,” Cliff said during the session. “Every strength taken to an extreme becomes a weakness.” Polarity thinking, both men said, gives systems thinking a theory, process, or tool that lets us tap into the thinking of each side in order to minimize the fear that each one may conjure up.Nov 7, 2011
Complex Adaptive Systems and International Security AnalysisNKHAYDEN
Overview of how various USG agencies use CAS concepts for analysis of international security problems. Presented as a university seminar to graduate students in international security policy studies at University of Maryland
This document discusses challenges in applying Amartya Sen's capability approach to policy evaluation. It outlines three main challenges: 1) selecting which functionings (beings and doings) to include in the evaluation, 2) whether to focus on capabilities (opportunities) or achievements, and 3) how to construct composite indexes of capabilities for comparison. The document explores issues around each challenge, including how to define and measure opportunities given their counterfactual nature, how to evaluate sets of capabilities, and how to account for social interdependencies between individuals. Examples of empirical applications of the capability approach are also reviewed.
Rational choice theory states that individuals make rational decisions to maximize personal benefits while minimizing costs. It assumes people rationally calculate costs and benefits when making choices to achieve the best outcomes for themselves. Key elements include individual preferences, beliefs, and constraints. Critics argue it neglects ethical and moral factors in decision making by focusing only on self-interest.
The Role of Agent-Based Modelling in Extending the Concept of Bounded Rationa...Edmund Chattoe-Brown
A seminar given to the Judgement and Decision Making Research Group in the Department of Neuroscience, Psychology and Behaviour, University of Leicester kindly asked me to give a seminar on 25 January 2023 on "The Role of Agent-Based Modelling in Extending the Concept of Bounded Rationality". It discusses the challenges to different research methods of dealing with subjective accounts and models a situation where people can be rational but communicate and have incomplete information about both the number of choices and their payoff. The model is based on this paper: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-009-0060-7 One interesting result is that, without coercion or mass media, minority groups may be disadvantaged in their decision making by hegemonic discourse.
The Social Transmission of Choice: An Exploratory Computer Simulation with Ap...Edmund Chattoe-Brown
Paper presented at the British Sociological Association Annual Conference (Social Connections: Identities, Technologies, Relationships), University of East London, 12-14 April.
The document describes rational choice theory and how it can be used to explain individual decision-making and social outcomes. It outlines the central assumptions of rational choice theory, which are that decision-makers have logically consistent goals and choose the best available option given those goals. Experimental methods and laboratory experiments are also discussed as ways to test rational choice theory by studying individual behavior in controlled settings with financial incentives.
There are two main challenges to utilitarianism: 1) Problems finding a defensible way to measure and determine the overall good or happiness, as there is no agreement on how to quantify it. 2) Differing views of what constitutes the good can undermine individual freedom if people are obligated to act in ways that maximize the good even if they don't want to. A third challenge is that utilitarianism's focus on consequences seems to justify sacrificing individuals for the greater overall good, which denies the principle that the ends don't justify the means and seems to violate duties of justice, equality, and other moral principles.
Develop a basic understanding of Critical Thinking and its use.
Develop a basic appreciation for a Total Life System.
Raise awareness to Contradictions in our lives and the world around us.
This document introduces three types of social science studies: case studies, cross-sectional studies, and longitudinal studies. It then discusses key concepts in social science research including variables, levels of measurement, and the relationship between independent and dependent variables. Finally, it explains important statistical concepts like the mean, median, and mode.
Discussion Individual vs. Structural-Cultural TheoriesTheorwiddowsonerica
Discussion: Individual vs. Structural-Cultural Theories
Theories
help frame more than presenting problems—they also frame social problems, and both types of problems can be linked in relation to client issues. For example, many scholars and social workers have attempted to understand the social problem of poverty. Turner and Lehning (2007) classified various psychological theories to explain poverty under two headings: (1) individual-related theories or (2) structural/cultural-related theories. In other words, think of these two headings as lenses in viewing poverty. In this Discussion, you apply lenses through which to understand a client's problem in relation to social problems.
To prepare:
Read this article listed in the Learning Resources: Turner, K., & Lehning, A. J. (2007). Psychological
theories
of poverty.
Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 16
(1/2), 57–72. doi:10.1300/J137v16n01-05
Select a
theory
under the individual-related
theories
and a theory under the structural/cultural-related theories.
Complete the handout “Comparing Individual-Related and Structural/Cultural-Related
Theories
” to help you craft your response. (
Note:
You do
not
need to upload the handout to the Discussion forum. The handout is intended to assist you in writing your Discussion post.)
By Day 3
Post:
Describe how a social worker would conceptualize a presenting problem of poverty from the two
theories
you selected.
Explain how this conceptualization differs from an individual-related versus a structural/cultural-related theoretical lens.
Compare how the two theoretical lenses differ in terms of how the social worker would approach the client and the problem and how the social worker would intervene.
By Day 5
Respond
to at least two colleagues:
Evaluate one identified strength and one identified limitation your colleague may encounter when employing an individual-related
theory
and a structural/cultural-related theory to formulating interventions for poverty.
Assignment: Application of Systems Theory to a Case Study
In this course, you will be asked to select one case study and to use it throughout the entire course. By doing this, you will have the opportunity to see how
theories
guide your view of a client and the client’s presenting problem. Although the case may be the same, each time you use a different
theory
, your perspective of the problem changes, which then changes how you go about asking the assessment questions and how you intervene.
The first theoretical approach you will use to apply to a case study is systems
theory
. In other words, your theoretical orientation—your lens—will be systems theory as you analyze a social work case study.
Different
theories
can be used to take a systems approach. For example, Bertalanffy’s General Systems
Theory
considers how a
system
is made of smaller
subsystems
that
influence each other
and seek
homeostasis
, whereas Brofennerbrenner’s Eco ...
This document provides notes on structural explanations in sociology and key concepts related to social influence and individual responsibility. It discusses how structural explanations focus on overall social patterns and collective outcomes rather than individual intentions. It also examines how individual actions and decisions are constrained by social influences and circumstances outside of one's control. The document introduces concepts like self-fulfilling and self-negating prophecies, emergence, and unintended consequences to analyze how individual behaviors aggregate to form broader social patterns.
1. The document discusses several key concepts in psychology including intuition, common sense, the scientific method, experimentation, correlation, causation, statistical analysis and making inferences from data. It provides examples to illustrate limits of intuition and use of various research methods.
2. Key research methods covered include case studies, surveys, naturalistic observation, experiments and correlation research. Steps of the scientific method and experimentation are outlined.
3. The importance of statistical analysis for interpreting data is emphasized. Concepts like measures of central tendency, variation, distributions and determining statistical significance are examined.
Bradford mvsu fall 2012 social problems lecture 1 shortJohn Bradford
This document provides an overview of key concepts related to social problems and sociological analysis. It discusses that a social problem involves both objective facts and subjective perceptions. Society consists of social structure, including institutions, social groups, statuses and roles, as well as culture, including beliefs, values, norms and symbols. It then outlines three major theoretical perspectives in sociology - functionalism, conflict theory and symbolic interactionism - and discusses concepts like latent and manifest functions. Finally, it covers basic social science research methods like experiments, surveys and field research.
This document provides an introduction to ethical theories and traditions. It begins with an outline that lists introduction to ethical theories, religious ethics vs. philosophical ethics, and utilitarianism. It then defines ethics as knowing right from wrong and applying that in a business context. Acting ethically means being honest, avoiding harm, competing fairly, and prioritizing stakeholders over self-interest. The document introduces utilitarianism as an ethical tradition that directs people to maximize well-being and promote the greatest good for the greatest number. It notes that utilitarianism can be difficult to apply due to challenges in measuring and comparing consequences. The document provides examples of how utilitarian reasoning could evaluate issues like child labor.
1) Social psychologists conduct both correlational and experimental research. Correlational research looks for natural associations between variables in real-world settings, while experimental research manipulates variables under controlled conditions to establish causation.
2) An example is provided of a correlational study finding that obese women had lower incomes even after controlling for other factors, suggesting possible discrimination. An experiment then showed men speaking less warmly to a woman they believed to be obese based on her photo.
3) Similarly, a correlation between children's TV violence viewing and aggression was examined experimentally by exposing some children to a violent TV episode and finding they then displayed more aggression than children who did not watch.
4) Experiments allow social psychologists to test
SWK3026 thinking philosophically about collaborative changeTim Curtis
This document discusses complex problems and collaborative social change. It introduces concepts like wicked problems, which are difficult to solve because they have no clear formulation or solution. The document suggests using systems thinking approaches like rich pictures and soft systems methodology to understand complex problems. Rich pictures are non-judgmental diagrams that can display the relationships within a problematic situation. The document provides an example rich picture and references for further reading on systems thinking concepts.
Implementation theory published_versionnurul khaiva
This document provides an overview of implementation theory in economics and social choice. It discusses how implementation problems aim to design mechanisms such that equilibrium outcomes satisfy social optimality as defined by a social choice rule.
It covers different solution concepts used in implementation like dominant strategies and Nash equilibrium. Dominant strategy mechanisms are difficult to achieve and often impossible. Nash equilibrium is less demanding and monotonicity is a necessary condition for Nash implementation. Monotonicity plus no veto power is sufficient for Nash implementation with at least three agents.
The document discusses examples like implementing Walrasian and Lindahl allocations in economic environments and implementing voting rules to select among alternatives. It also covers refinements of Nash equilibrium and Bayesian implementation when agents have private information
This document provides an introduction to complex adaptive systems theory. It explains that complex adaptive systems exist on the "edge of chaos," with enough stability to sustain themselves but also enough creativity for change and adaptation. Systems on this edge experience periods of order and disorder, with new patterns emerging during times of disequilibrium that allow for reintegration at a higher level of organization. The edge of chaos provides systems with the ability to learn, evolve, and adapt in response to changes in their environment.
Deontological Ethical Philosophies
Lecture
Rights
Merriam-Webster defines "right" as "something to which one has a just claim." That which he or she claims can be a tangible object, a privilege, the opportunity to behave in a certain way, or to have others behave towards him or her in a certain way. Some rights are legal and others are moral. If one's rights are protected by law, we consider them to be legal rights. Boatright also points out a distinction between specific and general rights. General rights might be considered “human rights” as they apply to all people. Specific rights are those that particular people possess due to their circumstances, such as an employment contract.
Rights can also be described as positive or negative. Negative rights act as barriers that keep others from limiting our rights, while a positive right obligates others to support our right or position in some way. My right to life is a negative right that keeps others from taking my life. However, it does not require others (individual people, organizations, or governments) to do anything or give anything to give me life.
Immanuel Kant developed an approach to decision making that requires one to act in a certain way simply because it is the right thing to do. He calls the approach the "categorical imperative," and communicates this imperative in various formulations. In addition to the categorical imperative, Kant wrote about hypothetical imperatives. These are conditional requirements, so that if a person wants something or believes he should do something, then he or she should take the necessary steps to fulfill that desire or that sense of obligation. The categorical imperative is not conditional in nature. There are two primary formulations of the categorical imperative.
First, Kant stated, "I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law." Do you think the decision makers who took Enron down the wrong road would recommend their decisions for all business people everywhere and at all times? Most likely not.
This formulation includes the concept of reversibility, which sounds like the Golden Rule. Basically, I must be willing for others to use my same rationale against me if the roles are reversed. Further, the concept also includes the element of universalizability. Every person at all times should be able to follow the rationale I use.
Kant's second formulation says, "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as means, but always at the same time as an end."
People should follow these formulations, according to Kant, even if breaking them seems to have more of a utilitarian benefit. Holding down one person or one class of persons might benefit society in general, but does not pass the test of reversibility or universalizability. For example, slavery is a very efficient means of increasing work productivity and keeping co.
This document provides an overview of utilitarianism as an ethical theory. It discusses key concepts of utilitarianism including:
- Utilitarianism directs people to make decisions based on producing the greatest good or happiness for the greatest number of people affected by the decision.
- There are different versions of utilitarianism including act and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism evaluates individual acts based on their consequences while rule utilitarianism follows general rules that maximize well-being.
- Calculating happiness and consequences is challenging for utilitarianism as experiences of pleasure and pain are complex with many factors to consider. However, utilitarianism provides a framework for evaluating different alternatives in decision making.
Globally inclusive approaches to measurement_Shigehiro Oishi.pdfStatsCommunications
This document discusses measurement issues in comparing well-being and culture across countries. It covers 5 main issues: 1) Response styles may not fully explain differences in life satisfaction scores between countries. 2) Well-being items do not always function the same way across cultures, though lack of measurement equivalence only partly explains score differences. 3) Self-presentation and 4) judgmental/memory biases may also contribute to differences to a small-moderate degree. 5) The meaning and desirability of happiness differs across cultures, which can further impact scores. The document also advocates developing indigenous well-being measures that are meaningful within each local context.
Globally inclusive approaches to measurement_Erhabor Idemudia.pdfStatsCommunications
This document discusses considerations for developing quality of life measures from an African perspective. It notes that many existing QoL instruments were developed for Western populations and do not account for cultural differences. In Africa, concepts like happiness are more closely tied to collective well-being and social harmony rather than individualism. The document also outlines some key African beliefs, like Ubuntu, which emphasizes interconnectedness. It argues that QoL measures for Africa must assess both objective and subjective domains, and be grounded in cultural values like family, community, and spirituality rather than only Western individualistic norms. Developing culturally appropriate QoL measures is important for capturing well-being in a meaningful way.
More Related Content
Similar to HLEG thematic workshop on "Inequality of Opportunity", Erik Schokkaert
This document discusses challenges in applying Amartya Sen's capability approach to policy evaluation. It outlines three main challenges: 1) selecting which functionings (beings and doings) to include in the evaluation, 2) whether to focus on capabilities (opportunities) or achievements, and 3) how to construct composite indexes of capabilities for comparison. The document explores issues around each challenge, including how to define and measure opportunities given their counterfactual nature, how to evaluate sets of capabilities, and how to account for social interdependencies between individuals. Examples of empirical applications of the capability approach are also reviewed.
Rational choice theory states that individuals make rational decisions to maximize personal benefits while minimizing costs. It assumes people rationally calculate costs and benefits when making choices to achieve the best outcomes for themselves. Key elements include individual preferences, beliefs, and constraints. Critics argue it neglects ethical and moral factors in decision making by focusing only on self-interest.
The Role of Agent-Based Modelling in Extending the Concept of Bounded Rationa...Edmund Chattoe-Brown
A seminar given to the Judgement and Decision Making Research Group in the Department of Neuroscience, Psychology and Behaviour, University of Leicester kindly asked me to give a seminar on 25 January 2023 on "The Role of Agent-Based Modelling in Extending the Concept of Bounded Rationality". It discusses the challenges to different research methods of dealing with subjective accounts and models a situation where people can be rational but communicate and have incomplete information about both the number of choices and their payoff. The model is based on this paper: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-009-0060-7 One interesting result is that, without coercion or mass media, minority groups may be disadvantaged in their decision making by hegemonic discourse.
The Social Transmission of Choice: An Exploratory Computer Simulation with Ap...Edmund Chattoe-Brown
Paper presented at the British Sociological Association Annual Conference (Social Connections: Identities, Technologies, Relationships), University of East London, 12-14 April.
The document describes rational choice theory and how it can be used to explain individual decision-making and social outcomes. It outlines the central assumptions of rational choice theory, which are that decision-makers have logically consistent goals and choose the best available option given those goals. Experimental methods and laboratory experiments are also discussed as ways to test rational choice theory by studying individual behavior in controlled settings with financial incentives.
There are two main challenges to utilitarianism: 1) Problems finding a defensible way to measure and determine the overall good or happiness, as there is no agreement on how to quantify it. 2) Differing views of what constitutes the good can undermine individual freedom if people are obligated to act in ways that maximize the good even if they don't want to. A third challenge is that utilitarianism's focus on consequences seems to justify sacrificing individuals for the greater overall good, which denies the principle that the ends don't justify the means and seems to violate duties of justice, equality, and other moral principles.
Develop a basic understanding of Critical Thinking and its use.
Develop a basic appreciation for a Total Life System.
Raise awareness to Contradictions in our lives and the world around us.
This document introduces three types of social science studies: case studies, cross-sectional studies, and longitudinal studies. It then discusses key concepts in social science research including variables, levels of measurement, and the relationship between independent and dependent variables. Finally, it explains important statistical concepts like the mean, median, and mode.
Discussion Individual vs. Structural-Cultural TheoriesTheorwiddowsonerica
Discussion: Individual vs. Structural-Cultural Theories
Theories
help frame more than presenting problems—they also frame social problems, and both types of problems can be linked in relation to client issues. For example, many scholars and social workers have attempted to understand the social problem of poverty. Turner and Lehning (2007) classified various psychological theories to explain poverty under two headings: (1) individual-related theories or (2) structural/cultural-related theories. In other words, think of these two headings as lenses in viewing poverty. In this Discussion, you apply lenses through which to understand a client's problem in relation to social problems.
To prepare:
Read this article listed in the Learning Resources: Turner, K., & Lehning, A. J. (2007). Psychological
theories
of poverty.
Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 16
(1/2), 57–72. doi:10.1300/J137v16n01-05
Select a
theory
under the individual-related
theories
and a theory under the structural/cultural-related theories.
Complete the handout “Comparing Individual-Related and Structural/Cultural-Related
Theories
” to help you craft your response. (
Note:
You do
not
need to upload the handout to the Discussion forum. The handout is intended to assist you in writing your Discussion post.)
By Day 3
Post:
Describe how a social worker would conceptualize a presenting problem of poverty from the two
theories
you selected.
Explain how this conceptualization differs from an individual-related versus a structural/cultural-related theoretical lens.
Compare how the two theoretical lenses differ in terms of how the social worker would approach the client and the problem and how the social worker would intervene.
By Day 5
Respond
to at least two colleagues:
Evaluate one identified strength and one identified limitation your colleague may encounter when employing an individual-related
theory
and a structural/cultural-related theory to formulating interventions for poverty.
Assignment: Application of Systems Theory to a Case Study
In this course, you will be asked to select one case study and to use it throughout the entire course. By doing this, you will have the opportunity to see how
theories
guide your view of a client and the client’s presenting problem. Although the case may be the same, each time you use a different
theory
, your perspective of the problem changes, which then changes how you go about asking the assessment questions and how you intervene.
The first theoretical approach you will use to apply to a case study is systems
theory
. In other words, your theoretical orientation—your lens—will be systems theory as you analyze a social work case study.
Different
theories
can be used to take a systems approach. For example, Bertalanffy’s General Systems
Theory
considers how a
system
is made of smaller
subsystems
that
influence each other
and seek
homeostasis
, whereas Brofennerbrenner’s Eco ...
This document provides notes on structural explanations in sociology and key concepts related to social influence and individual responsibility. It discusses how structural explanations focus on overall social patterns and collective outcomes rather than individual intentions. It also examines how individual actions and decisions are constrained by social influences and circumstances outside of one's control. The document introduces concepts like self-fulfilling and self-negating prophecies, emergence, and unintended consequences to analyze how individual behaviors aggregate to form broader social patterns.
1. The document discusses several key concepts in psychology including intuition, common sense, the scientific method, experimentation, correlation, causation, statistical analysis and making inferences from data. It provides examples to illustrate limits of intuition and use of various research methods.
2. Key research methods covered include case studies, surveys, naturalistic observation, experiments and correlation research. Steps of the scientific method and experimentation are outlined.
3. The importance of statistical analysis for interpreting data is emphasized. Concepts like measures of central tendency, variation, distributions and determining statistical significance are examined.
Bradford mvsu fall 2012 social problems lecture 1 shortJohn Bradford
This document provides an overview of key concepts related to social problems and sociological analysis. It discusses that a social problem involves both objective facts and subjective perceptions. Society consists of social structure, including institutions, social groups, statuses and roles, as well as culture, including beliefs, values, norms and symbols. It then outlines three major theoretical perspectives in sociology - functionalism, conflict theory and symbolic interactionism - and discusses concepts like latent and manifest functions. Finally, it covers basic social science research methods like experiments, surveys and field research.
This document provides an introduction to ethical theories and traditions. It begins with an outline that lists introduction to ethical theories, religious ethics vs. philosophical ethics, and utilitarianism. It then defines ethics as knowing right from wrong and applying that in a business context. Acting ethically means being honest, avoiding harm, competing fairly, and prioritizing stakeholders over self-interest. The document introduces utilitarianism as an ethical tradition that directs people to maximize well-being and promote the greatest good for the greatest number. It notes that utilitarianism can be difficult to apply due to challenges in measuring and comparing consequences. The document provides examples of how utilitarian reasoning could evaluate issues like child labor.
1) Social psychologists conduct both correlational and experimental research. Correlational research looks for natural associations between variables in real-world settings, while experimental research manipulates variables under controlled conditions to establish causation.
2) An example is provided of a correlational study finding that obese women had lower incomes even after controlling for other factors, suggesting possible discrimination. An experiment then showed men speaking less warmly to a woman they believed to be obese based on her photo.
3) Similarly, a correlation between children's TV violence viewing and aggression was examined experimentally by exposing some children to a violent TV episode and finding they then displayed more aggression than children who did not watch.
4) Experiments allow social psychologists to test
SWK3026 thinking philosophically about collaborative changeTim Curtis
This document discusses complex problems and collaborative social change. It introduces concepts like wicked problems, which are difficult to solve because they have no clear formulation or solution. The document suggests using systems thinking approaches like rich pictures and soft systems methodology to understand complex problems. Rich pictures are non-judgmental diagrams that can display the relationships within a problematic situation. The document provides an example rich picture and references for further reading on systems thinking concepts.
Implementation theory published_versionnurul khaiva
This document provides an overview of implementation theory in economics and social choice. It discusses how implementation problems aim to design mechanisms such that equilibrium outcomes satisfy social optimality as defined by a social choice rule.
It covers different solution concepts used in implementation like dominant strategies and Nash equilibrium. Dominant strategy mechanisms are difficult to achieve and often impossible. Nash equilibrium is less demanding and monotonicity is a necessary condition for Nash implementation. Monotonicity plus no veto power is sufficient for Nash implementation with at least three agents.
The document discusses examples like implementing Walrasian and Lindahl allocations in economic environments and implementing voting rules to select among alternatives. It also covers refinements of Nash equilibrium and Bayesian implementation when agents have private information
This document provides an introduction to complex adaptive systems theory. It explains that complex adaptive systems exist on the "edge of chaos," with enough stability to sustain themselves but also enough creativity for change and adaptation. Systems on this edge experience periods of order and disorder, with new patterns emerging during times of disequilibrium that allow for reintegration at a higher level of organization. The edge of chaos provides systems with the ability to learn, evolve, and adapt in response to changes in their environment.
Deontological Ethical Philosophies
Lecture
Rights
Merriam-Webster defines "right" as "something to which one has a just claim." That which he or she claims can be a tangible object, a privilege, the opportunity to behave in a certain way, or to have others behave towards him or her in a certain way. Some rights are legal and others are moral. If one's rights are protected by law, we consider them to be legal rights. Boatright also points out a distinction between specific and general rights. General rights might be considered “human rights” as they apply to all people. Specific rights are those that particular people possess due to their circumstances, such as an employment contract.
Rights can also be described as positive or negative. Negative rights act as barriers that keep others from limiting our rights, while a positive right obligates others to support our right or position in some way. My right to life is a negative right that keeps others from taking my life. However, it does not require others (individual people, organizations, or governments) to do anything or give anything to give me life.
Immanuel Kant developed an approach to decision making that requires one to act in a certain way simply because it is the right thing to do. He calls the approach the "categorical imperative," and communicates this imperative in various formulations. In addition to the categorical imperative, Kant wrote about hypothetical imperatives. These are conditional requirements, so that if a person wants something or believes he should do something, then he or she should take the necessary steps to fulfill that desire or that sense of obligation. The categorical imperative is not conditional in nature. There are two primary formulations of the categorical imperative.
First, Kant stated, "I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law." Do you think the decision makers who took Enron down the wrong road would recommend their decisions for all business people everywhere and at all times? Most likely not.
This formulation includes the concept of reversibility, which sounds like the Golden Rule. Basically, I must be willing for others to use my same rationale against me if the roles are reversed. Further, the concept also includes the element of universalizability. Every person at all times should be able to follow the rationale I use.
Kant's second formulation says, "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as means, but always at the same time as an end."
People should follow these formulations, according to Kant, even if breaking them seems to have more of a utilitarian benefit. Holding down one person or one class of persons might benefit society in general, but does not pass the test of reversibility or universalizability. For example, slavery is a very efficient means of increasing work productivity and keeping co.
This document provides an overview of utilitarianism as an ethical theory. It discusses key concepts of utilitarianism including:
- Utilitarianism directs people to make decisions based on producing the greatest good or happiness for the greatest number of people affected by the decision.
- There are different versions of utilitarianism including act and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism evaluates individual acts based on their consequences while rule utilitarianism follows general rules that maximize well-being.
- Calculating happiness and consequences is challenging for utilitarianism as experiences of pleasure and pain are complex with many factors to consider. However, utilitarianism provides a framework for evaluating different alternatives in decision making.
Similar to HLEG thematic workshop on "Inequality of Opportunity", Erik Schokkaert (20)
Globally inclusive approaches to measurement_Shigehiro Oishi.pdfStatsCommunications
This document discusses measurement issues in comparing well-being and culture across countries. It covers 5 main issues: 1) Response styles may not fully explain differences in life satisfaction scores between countries. 2) Well-being items do not always function the same way across cultures, though lack of measurement equivalence only partly explains score differences. 3) Self-presentation and 4) judgmental/memory biases may also contribute to differences to a small-moderate degree. 5) The meaning and desirability of happiness differs across cultures, which can further impact scores. The document also advocates developing indigenous well-being measures that are meaningful within each local context.
Globally inclusive approaches to measurement_Erhabor Idemudia.pdfStatsCommunications
This document discusses considerations for developing quality of life measures from an African perspective. It notes that many existing QoL instruments were developed for Western populations and do not account for cultural differences. In Africa, concepts like happiness are more closely tied to collective well-being and social harmony rather than individualism. The document also outlines some key African beliefs, like Ubuntu, which emphasizes interconnectedness. It argues that QoL measures for Africa must assess both objective and subjective domains, and be grounded in cultural values like family, community, and spirituality rather than only Western individualistic norms. Developing culturally appropriate QoL measures is important for capturing well-being in a meaningful way.
Globally inclusive approaches to measurement_Rosemary Goodyear.pdfStatsCommunications
Stats NZ has taken several steps to incorporate Māori perspectives when measuring quality of life and well-being in New Zealand. This includes developing the Te Kupenga Māori social survey, incorporating some concepts from Te Kupenga into the General Social Survey, working with partners on using administrative data for Māori, and trialling iwi-led data collections for the Census. Te Kupenga uses frameworks like Whare Tapu Whā and focuses on cultural well-being areas like spirituality, customs, te reo Māori, and social connectedness. It provides statistics on these areas as well as demographics, paid work, health, and other topics from a Māori
A better understanding of domain satisfaction: Validity and policy use_Alessa...StatsCommunications
The document discusses Italy's inclusion of domain satisfaction indicators in its framework for measuring well-being (BES). It provides background on Italy's system of social surveys and outlines the development of the BES project, which aims to measure equitable and sustainable well-being. The BES framework includes 12 domains of well-being and over 150 indicators, including subjective well-being indicators and indicators measuring satisfaction within other domains like health, work, relationships, safety, environment and more. The document presents examples of domain satisfaction indicators and trends over time in areas like friends relations and landscape satisfaction.
A better understanding of domain satisfaction: Validity and policy use_Anthon...StatsCommunications
Domain satisfaction measures provide valid and useful information about people's lives beyond overall life satisfaction. Research has found that domain satisfaction captures different aspects of well-being than objective indicators alone, and that different life domains contribute differently to individual happiness. While domain satisfaction may be socially constructed and culturally variable, current policy efforts can still benefit from considering subjective experiences of satisfaction across life domains. Future research opportunities include exploring the multidimensional relationships between domain satisfaction and broader concepts of well-being.
A better understanding of domain satisfaction: Validity and policy use_Marian...StatsCommunications
Domains of life are important for understanding life satisfaction and informing better policymaking. The document discusses four key points:
1) It is important to consider multiple domains of life, not just economic factors, to understand people's overall well-being.
2) Domains of life represent different areas that people spend their time and where they make decisions, such as family, health, work, community.
3) Considering domains of life can provide insight into life satisfaction and help create more effective policies in areas like health, education, and social programs.
4) Current government institutions and policies can be better aligned to impact the domains of life that influence overall life satisfaction.
Measuring subjective well-being in children and young people_Sabrina Twilhaar...StatsCommunications
This document summarizes Sabrina Twilhaar's presentation on new frontiers in subjective well-being measurement for children. It discusses Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory and how children's well-being is influenced by multiple levels including micro (family, peers), meso (school), exo (neighborhood), and macro (culture, economy) systems. It then reviews literature on conceptualizing and measuring hedonic and eudaimonic well-being in children, noting gaps like a focus on life satisfaction over affect. Research finds children's well-being varies by age and sex, and is associated with family relationships and bullying. Overall, more work is needed to develop valid cross-cultural measures of multiple
Towards a more comprehensive measure of eudaimonia_Nancy Hey.pdfStatsCommunications
This document summarizes recent research on measuring subjective well-being, with a focus on measuring how worthwhile people feel the things they do in life are. Some key findings include:
- In the UK, on average people rate their sense that the things they do are worthwhile at 7.86 out of 10, while 3.8% rate it between 0-4 out of 10.
- People in their late 60s and early 70s report the highest sense of worthwhile, while people over 85 and those aged 18-24 report the lowest.
- Factors associated with a higher sense of worthwhile include being older than 45/55, female, white, belonging to a religion, home ownership, higher income
Towards a more comprehensive measure of eudaimonia_Carol Graham.pdfStatsCommunications
1) The document discusses measuring hope as a distinct dimension of well-being, in addition to evaluative, hedonic, and eudaimonic measures. Hope is strongly linked to future-oriented behavior and investing in one's future.
2) Research has found unequal distributions of hope can act as a barrier to health and prosperity. People with higher hope are more likely to aspire to and achieve education and avoid risky behaviors. They also earn more, have stronger social connections, and live longer, healthier lives.
3) Areas and communities with high despair show vulnerabilities like increased deaths of despair, misinformation, and radicalization. Restoring hope is important for mental health recovery and addressing societal threats
Towards a more comprehensive measure of eudaimonia_Carol Ryff.pdfStatsCommunications
This document summarizes Carol Ryff's presentation on bringing measures of eudaimonia or human flourishing to OECD measures of subjective well-being. Ryff discusses defining eudaimonia based on Aristotle and modern views, developing scales to measure six dimensions of eudaimonia, and scientific findings linking higher eudaimonia to better health outcomes. Ryff also notes growing inequality in measures of well-being and calls for credible measurement of select eudaimonic factors like purpose in life and personal growth to be included in large-scale studies like those by OECD to better inform public policy. There is potential for synergies between longitudinal cohort studies providing evidence and OECD's focus on policy issues.
Revisiting affect: Which states to measure, and how_Lucia Macchia.pdfStatsCommunications
This document discusses the relationship between physical pain and subjective well-being. It notes that physical pain can negatively impact subjective well-being through physical, socioeconomic, psychosocial, and behavioral factors. The document reviews several studies that have examined the links between pain and subjective well-being. It also presents data from the Gallup World Poll that shows trends in physical pain between 2009-2021 across 146 countries, and correlations between indicators of subjective well-being and physical pain. The document argues that governments should consider measuring physical pain when assessing societal well-being.
Revisiting affect: Which states to measure, and how_Conal Smith.pdfStatsCommunications
1) The document discusses the use of experienced wellbeing measures in cost-wellbeing analysis and recent developments in this area. It notes key challenges in obtaining meaningful income coefficients for experienced wellbeing measures compared to life satisfaction measures.
2) Regression results are presented analyzing the relationship between life satisfaction, experienced wellbeing measures like happiness, and factors like income, location, and life events. Income is found to have a smaller effect on experienced wellbeing than life satisfaction.
3) An application of using experienced wellbeing data to value urban green space is described, with results suggesting experienced wellbeing may provide different valuations than typical hedonic pricing estimates.
Revisiting affect: Which states to measure, and how_Arthur Stone.pdfStatsCommunications
This document summarizes Arthur Stone's presentation on the OECD's recommendations for measuring affective subjective well-being. Stone argues that the OECD's original strategy of measuring positive and negative affect using a yesterday recall period was sound. However, he suggests broadening the definition of affective well-being to include self-reported pain. Stone presents research showing monitoring pain in populations over time can provide insights, such as revealing increased rates of pain in younger generations without college degrees. He concludes by recommending the expansion of affective well-being measures in line with considering a broader definition and the drivers of its components.
Presentation from Tatsuyoshi Oba, Executive Manager of Group HR Division, Persol Holdings during the OECD WISE Centre & Persol Holdings Workshop on Advancing Employee Well-being in Business and Finance, 22 November 2023
Presentation from Amy Browne, Stewardship Lead, CCLA Investment Management, during the OECD WISE Centre & Persol Holdings Workshop on Advancing Employee Well-being in Business and Finance, 22 November 2023
Global Situational Awareness of A.I. and where its headedvikram sood
You can see the future first in San Francisco.
Over the past year, the talk of the town has shifted from $10 billion compute clusters to $100 billion clusters to trillion-dollar clusters. Every six months another zero is added to the boardroom plans. Behind the scenes, there’s a fierce scramble to secure every power contract still available for the rest of the decade, every voltage transformer that can possibly be procured. American big business is gearing up to pour trillions of dollars into a long-unseen mobilization of American industrial might. By the end of the decade, American electricity production will have grown tens of percent; from the shale fields of Pennsylvania to the solar farms of Nevada, hundreds of millions of GPUs will hum.
The AGI race has begun. We are building machines that can think and reason. By 2025/26, these machines will outpace college graduates. By the end of the decade, they will be smarter than you or I; we will have superintelligence, in the true sense of the word. Along the way, national security forces not seen in half a century will be un-leashed, and before long, The Project will be on. If we’re lucky, we’ll be in an all-out race with the CCP; if we’re unlucky, an all-out war.
Everyone is now talking about AI, but few have the faintest glimmer of what is about to hit them. Nvidia analysts still think 2024 might be close to the peak. Mainstream pundits are stuck on the wilful blindness of “it’s just predicting the next word”. They see only hype and business-as-usual; at most they entertain another internet-scale technological change.
Before long, the world will wake up. But right now, there are perhaps a few hundred people, most of them in San Francisco and the AI labs, that have situational awareness. Through whatever peculiar forces of fate, I have found myself amongst them. A few years ago, these people were derided as crazy—but they trusted the trendlines, which allowed them to correctly predict the AI advances of the past few years. Whether these people are also right about the next few years remains to be seen. But these are very smart people—the smartest people I have ever met—and they are the ones building this technology. Perhaps they will be an odd footnote in history, or perhaps they will go down in history like Szilard and Oppenheimer and Teller. If they are seeing the future even close to correctly, we are in for a wild ride.
Let me tell you what we see.
Beyond the Basics of A/B Tests: Highly Innovative Experimentation Tactics You...Aggregage
This webinar will explore cutting-edge, less familiar but powerful experimentation methodologies which address well-known limitations of standard A/B Testing. Designed for data and product leaders, this session aims to inspire the embrace of innovative approaches and provide insights into the frontiers of experimentation!
4th Modern Marketing Reckoner by MMA Global India & Group M: 60+ experts on W...Social Samosa
The Modern Marketing Reckoner (MMR) is a comprehensive resource packed with POVs from 60+ industry leaders on how AI is transforming the 4 key pillars of marketing – product, place, price and promotions.
Analysis insight about a Flyball dog competition team's performanceroli9797
Insight of my analysis about a Flyball dog competition team's last year performance. Find more: https://github.com/rolandnagy-ds/flyball_race_analysis/tree/main
Codeless Generative AI Pipelines
(GenAI with Milvus)
https://ml.dssconf.pl/user.html#!/lecture/DSSML24-041a/rate
Discover the potential of real-time streaming in the context of GenAI as we delve into the intricacies of Apache NiFi and its capabilities. Learn how this tool can significantly simplify the data engineering workflow for GenAI applications, allowing you to focus on the creative aspects rather than the technical complexities. I will guide you through practical examples and use cases, showing the impact of automation on prompt building. From data ingestion to transformation and delivery, witness how Apache NiFi streamlines the entire pipeline, ensuring a smooth and hassle-free experience.
Timothy Spann
https://www.youtube.com/@FLaNK-Stack
https://medium.com/@tspann
https://www.datainmotion.dev/
milvus, unstructured data, vector database, zilliz, cloud, vectors, python, deep learning, generative ai, genai, nifi, kafka, flink, streaming, iot, edge
Predictably Improve Your B2B Tech Company's Performance by Leveraging DataKiwi Creative
Harness the power of AI-backed reports, benchmarking and data analysis to predict trends and detect anomalies in your marketing efforts.
Peter Caputa, CEO at Databox, reveals how you can discover the strategies and tools to increase your growth rate (and margins!).
From metrics to track to data habits to pick up, enhance your reporting for powerful insights to improve your B2B tech company's marketing.
- - -
This is the webinar recording from the June 2024 HubSpot User Group (HUG) for B2B Technology USA.
Watch the video recording at https://youtu.be/5vjwGfPN9lw
Sign up for future HUG events at https://events.hubspot.com/b2b-technology-usa/
2. 2
Introduction
• Egalitarian approaches: equality of what? Growing
criticism on welfarist (subjective well-being)
approaches. Individuals should not be compensated for
expensive tastes.
• The issue of responsibility has invaded social choice
and political philosophy (“luck egalitarianism”) in recent
decades.
3. 1. Philosophical foundations
• John RAWLS, A theory of justice (1971):
– autonomous moral agents must get the freedom and
assume responsibility of pursuing their own personal
conception of the good life.
– resulting differences in well-being are their own
responsibility.
• Ronald DWORKIN, What is equality? (1971)
– personal talents and handicaps to be seen as
internal resources.
– a good distribution of resources must be
endowment-insensitive but ambition-sensitive.
3
4. 4
From preferences to control?
• Richard ARNESON (1989), Gerald COHEN (1989),
John ROEMER (1993)
– individuals should only be held responsible for
characteristics and decisions that are within their
own control (e.g. not for preferences that are
“imposed” upon them by their education)
5. Formal economic theory
• Define an outcome function:
𝑦𝑖 = 𝑓 𝑥𝑖 = 𝑓(𝑐𝑖, 𝑟𝑖)
– “mechanism” determining the outcome (however
measured).
– two sets of variables: “compensation”
(circumstances/types) and “responsibility” (effort).
– typical example of circumstance: SES parents.
• QUESTION: how to “measure” inequality if we want to
“compensate” individuals for differences in c while
holding them “responsible” for differences in r?
5
6. • The formal framework is “general”, in that it holds for all
possible responsibility cuts.
• Existing conditional approaches (e.g. socio-economic
health inequalities) are just primitive versions of this
general framework.
• I will come back to the question of the “responsibility
cut” at the end. For the moment, let us follow the
“control” approach.
6
7. 2. Normative choices
• Implementing responsibility-sensitive egalitarianism
requires taking a position on two issues:
– what to “equalize”?
– how to introduce “responsibility”?
• Let us assume (for convenience) that we can
distinguish “discrete” types, i.e. groups of individuals in
identical circumstances.
7
8. Question 1: compensation
1. EX ANTE COMPENSATION: equalize the “value” of
the opportunity sets of the different types.
8
10. Question 1: compensation
1. EX ANTE COMPENSATION: equalize the “value” of
the opportunity sets of the different types.
– Example: “average incomes” per type.
2. EX POST COMPENSATION:
∀𝑖, 𝑗 with 𝑟𝑖 = 𝑟𝑗, 𝑦𝑖 = 𝑦𝑗
10
12. • Special case: if everybody exerts the same effort, this
implies pure outcome egalitarianism.
• Ex ante compensation and ex post compensation are in
general incompatible.
12
13. Question 2: “responsibility”
• How to treat individuals at different effort levels?
• Thought experiment: what to do if everybody is of the
same “type” (same circumstances)?
• Two approaches:
1. “Utilitarian reward” (Roemer)
2. Liberal reward (Fleurbaey)
13
15. • IF everybody is of the same “type” (has the same
circumstances), maximize the sum of outcomes.
15
16. 16
“Liberal reward” (Marc Fleurbaey, 2008)
• Outcome differences between two persons of the same
type should not be affected by the redistribution.
• IF everybody is of the same “type” (has the same
circumstances), there is no need for redistribution. (“On
average, the system gets it right”).
17. Yet another impossibility...
• Both liberal reward and utilitarian reward are
incompatible with ex post compensation.
17
18. 3. Inequality measures
• The number of empirical applications is rapidly growing,
but not all of them are closely linked to the social choice
background.
• In general, distinction between “direct” and “indirect”
approaches.
• Example: direct, ex ante
𝐼 𝑦𝑡
i.e. inequality in the average incomes per type.
18
19. 19
Conditions for a good inequity measure
• CONDITION 1 (NO INFLUENCE OF LEGITIMATE
DIFFERENCES). A measure of unfair inequality should
not reflect legitimate variation in outcomes, i.e.
inequalities which are caused by differences in the
responsibility variables.
• CONDITION 2 (COMPENSATION). If a measure of unfair
inequality is zero, there should be no illegitimate
differences left, i.e. two individuals with the same value for
the responsibility variables should have the same
outcome.
20. Direct, ex post: direct unfairness
• Fix a reference value for the responsibility variables and
calculate
𝑦𝑖
𝐷𝑈
= 𝑓 𝑐𝑖, 𝑟 .
• Calculate the inequality 𝐼(𝑦𝑖
𝐷𝑈
).
• By construction this measure can only capture
“illegitimate inequality”. However, it does not satisfy
“compensation”.
20
21. Inequality in fairness gaps
• Fix a reference value for the circumstance variables
and calculate a “norm” outcome for i:
𝑦𝑖
𝑁𝑂𝑅𝑀
= 𝑓 𝑐, 𝑟𝑖 .
• Calculate the distance between the norm outcome and
the actual outcome. This is called the “fairness gap”:
𝑓𝑔𝑖 = 𝑦𝑖 − 𝑦𝑖
𝑁𝑂𝑅𝑀
.
• Calculate the inequality 𝐼 𝑓𝑔𝑖 .
• This measure satisfies compensation, but includes also
some “legitimate” inequalities.
21
22. Indirect approach
• It has become popular in the literature to calculate
“inequality of opportunity” as
𝐼 𝐼𝐸𝑂𝑃 = 𝐼 𝑦𝑖 − 𝐼(𝑦𝑖
𝑁𝑂𝑅𝑀
).
• Yet this is a very strange measure.
– EXAMPLE: take 𝑦 𝑁𝑂𝑅𝑀
= 20, 40 .
– Compare two income distributions: (20, 40) and
(40,20).
– These will give the same value for 𝐼 𝐼𝐸𝑂𝑃
.
• Not surprisingly, the (scarce) empirical evidence shows
that 𝐼 𝑓𝑔𝑖 ≫ 𝐼 𝐼𝐸𝑂𝑃. 22
23. 4. Implemention with imperfect info
• In practice, information will be incomplete. The
estimation result will be
𝑦𝑖 = 𝑓 𝑐𝑖
𝐼
, 𝑟𝑖
𝐼
, 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖 .
• Usually, some circumstance variables are easily
observed (e.g. SES of parents).
• Yet, if description of types is incomplete, estimated
inequality will be a lower boundary of actual inequality.
23
24. 𝑦𝑖 = 𝑓 𝑐𝑖
𝐼
, 𝑟𝑖
𝐼
, 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖
• “Effort” is very often not observed, and even
conceptually more difficult.
– e.g. number of hours worked?
• What if effort and circumstances are correlated? Can
individuals be held responsible for the effort distribution
of their type?
– RIA (Roemer’s identifying assumption): effort of individual i
measured by the percentile (s)he occupies in the outcome
distribution of his (her) type. VERY CONVENIENT!
24
25. • An alternative? Try to estimate a structural model:
𝑦𝑖 = 𝑓 𝑐𝑖, 𝑟𝑖
𝑟𝑖 = 𝑔(𝑐𝑖, 𝑧𝑖)
• Some have argued that it is sufficient to estimate a
reduced form 𝑦𝑖 = ℎ 𝑐𝑖 , as the indirect effect of effort
through circumstances would then be captured by the
reduced form effect of 𝑐𝑖.
– This does not work for all measures and/or non-linear
specifications.
– Moreover, some variables may play a double role. Example:
health care as an outcome, age differences signal needs
differences (r-variable in this setting), but may also lead to
discrimination.
25
26. 𝑦𝑖 = 𝑓 𝑐𝑖
𝐼
, 𝑟𝑖
𝐼
, 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖
• Most difficult issue, as the residual will capture “luck”,
but also the effects of misspecification and omitted
variables.
• Treatment of luck?
– Dworkin: brute luck vs option luck.
– Trannoy et al.: luck as a third category.
• Often the residual is simply neglected. The
interpretation of this practice will depend on the
inequality measure used. Better: lower and upper
boundary?
26
27. 5. The responsibility cut
• “Responsibility as control” is the most popular
approach, but it faces huge difficulties.
27
28. 28
Responsibility as control
• Seems intuitively very attractive and dominates the
empirical work.
• “Genuine control” requires that one also corrects for
interindividual differences in (internal) choice-making
abilities and in the (external) environment (in so far as it
is not chosen by the individual).
29. 29
Problem 1: determinism and free will
• Is there any room left for “control” in a deterministic
world, if we better and better can understand and
explain behaviour?
• In general, in a world where the belief in determinism
seems great, “it is difficult to expand equality of
opportunity in ways that satisfactorily address the
constraining effects of social circumstance, gender
socialisation, cultural convictions and so on, without
undermining the idea of people as responsible agents”
(Phillips, J. Pol. Philosophy, 2006)
30. 30
Problem 2: the economic model
• in models of “rational choice”, individual decisions are
analysed as resulting from a mechanical optimization
exercise with a given objective (preferences) and a
given set of options (determined by budget set and
possibly additional constraints).
• in this model, genuine choice is an elusive notion.
31. A possible way out?
• Responsibility practices in a given society. Even if we
cannot choose freely, as human beings we need the
feeling that we are to some extent free, and society
needs to impose rules that give citizens a “feeling” of
responsibility.
• This makes the responsibility cut time- and society-
dependent (John Roemer).
31
32. 32
Responsibility for preferences
• Back to Rawls and Dworkin: individuals are held
responsible for their preferences (their conceptions of a
good life), even if these preferences are not chosen/are
not under their control.
• Dworkin: respect for individuals implies respect for their
preferences with which they identify (when people
endorse their preferences, it is bizarre to consider these
as a piece of bad luck)
33. 33
Autonomy and freedom (Fleurbaey, 2008)
• Responsibility is not something which justifies
disadvantages, but something which is assumed by
individuals when they accept liabilities: justified by
independent fairness principles.
• Autonomous individuals must have the freedom to
practice the activity of choice as much as desired and
possible.
34. 34
How to recover preferences?
• a structural model is needed to identify preferences.
• NOTE:
– if the outcome of interest is well-being, this leads to
simple egalitarianism in terms of a concept of well-
being that does respect preferences without being
subjective utility.
35. 35
Conclusion
• (In)equality of opportunity comes in different forms:
– control vs preferences.
– liberal vs utilitarian reward.
– ex post vs ex ante compensation.
• A variety of measures is available, satisfying well-
defined axioms. For egalitarians, inequality in the
fairness gaps seems the most attractive.
• Booming empirical literature of variable quality adds to
the confusion.
36. • In my view, it is scientifically sound and ethically
attractive to clearly distinguish between the “estimation”
and the “evaluation” stage:
– STEP 1: try to understand as well as possible the
relationship between the outcomes and the different
circumstance, responsibility, mixed variables. Do not
put the empirical analysis in the straitjacket of a
simplified normative theory.
– STEP 2: implement an attractive inequality measure.
– STEP 3: take care to calculate upper and lower
bounds. Think explicitly about the residuals.
36