Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Alternativ können Sie versuchen, selbst über Ihren lokalen Bibliothekskatalog auf das gewünschte Dokument zuzugreifen.
Bei Zugriffsproblemen kontaktieren Sie uns gern.
39 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
SSRN
In: The European journal of the history of economic thought, Band 29, Heft 3, S. 569-572
ISSN: 1469-5936
In: This paper is a draft of chapter 2 of Matthew D. Adler and Ole F. Norheim, eds., Prioritarianism in Practice (Cambridge University Press, Forthcoming).
SSRN
In: Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series No. 2020-40
SSRN
Working paper
In: Oxford University Press, 2019
SSRN
In: Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series No. 2017-19
SSRN
In: Journal of benefit-cost analysis: JBCA, Band 7, Heft 1, S. 196-219
ISSN: 2152-2812
Two important developments in recent policy analysis are behavioral economics and subjective-well-being (SWB) surveys. What is the connection between them? Some have suggested that behavioral economics strengthens the case for SWB surveys as a central policy tool, e.g., in the form of SWB-based cost-benefit analysis. This article reaches a different conclusion. Behavioral economics shows that individuals in their day-to-day, "System 1" behavior are not expected utility (EU-) rational – that they often fail to comply with the norms of rationality set forth by EU theory. Consider now that the standard preference-based view of individual well-being looks to individuals' rational preferences. If the findings of behavioral economics are correct, an individual's answer to a question such as "How satisfied are you with your life?" is not going to tell us much about her rational (EU-compliant) preferences. Behavioral economics, by highlighting widespread failures of EU rationality, might actually argue for an objective-good (non-preference-based) view of well-being. However (except in the limiting case of an objective-good view positing a single mentalistic good, happiness), SWB surveys will not be strong evidence of well-being in the objective-good sense. In short, SWB surveys are no "magic cure" for the genuine difficulties in inferring rational preferences and measuring well-being underscored by behavioral economics.
SSRN
Working paper
SSRN
Working paper
In: Matthew D. Adler, WELL-BEING AND FAIR DISTRIBUTION: BEYOND COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS, Oxford University Press, 2012
SSRN
In: The Rule of Recognition and the U.S. Constitution, S. 193-234
In: U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 09-02
SSRN