https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.2307%2F3343168.pdf

Development as Freedom

NUDGE: IMPROVING DECISIONS ABOUT HEALTH, WEALTH, AND HAPPINESS by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein Penguin Books, 2009, 312 pp, ISBN 978-0-14-311526-7This book is best described formally as a general explanation of and advocacy for libertarian paternalism, a term coined by the authors in earlier publications. Informally, it is about how leaders, systems, organizations, and governments can nudge people to do the things the nudgers want and need done for the betterment of the nudgees, or of society. It is paternalism in the sense that "it is legitimate for choice architects to try to influence people's behavior in order to make their lives longer, healthier, and better", (p. 5) It is libertarian in that "people should be free to do what they like - and to opt out of undesirable arrangements if they want to do so", (p. 5) The built-in possibility of opting out or making a different choice preserves freedom of choice even though people's behavior has been influenced by the nature of the presentation of the information or by the structure of the decisionmaking system. I had never heard of libertarian paternalism before reading this book, and I now find it fascinating.Written for a general audience, this book contains mostly social and behavioral science theory and models, but there is considerable discussion of structure and process that has roots in mathematical and quantitative modeling. One of the main applications of this social system is economic choice in investing, selecting and purchasing products and services, systems of taxes, banking (mortgages, borrowing, savings), and retirement systems. Other quantitative social choice systems discussed include environmental effects, health care plans, gambling, and organ donations. Softer issues that are also subject to a nudge-based approach are marriage, education, eating, drinking, smoking, influence, spread of information, and politics. There is something in this book for everyone.The basis for this libertarian paternalism concept is in the social theory called "science of choice", the study of the design and implementation of influence systems on various kinds of people. The terms Econs and Humans, are used to refer to people with either considerable or little rational decision-making talent, respectively. The various libertarian paternalism concepts and systems presented are tested and compared in light of these two types of people. Two foundational issues that this book has in common with another book, Network of Echoes: Imitation, Innovation and Invisible Leaders, that was also reviewed for this issue of the Journal are that 1 ) there are two modes of thinking (or components of the brain) - an automatic (intuitive) process and a reflective (rational) process and 2) the need for conformity and the desire for imitation are powerful forces in human behavior. …

Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness

1.. HARD CASES 5. Legal Rights A. Legislation . . . We might therefore do well to consider how a philosophical judge might develop, in appropriate cases, theories of what legislative purpose and legal principles require. We shall find that he would construct these theories in the same manner as a philosophical referee would construct the character of a game. I have invented, for this purpose, a lawyer of superhuman skill, learning, patience and acumen, whom I shall call Hercules. I suppose that Hercules is a judge in some representative American jurisdiction. I assume that he accepts the main uncontroversial constitutive and regulative rules of the law in his jurisdiction. He accepts, that is, that statutes have the general power to create and extinguish legal rights, and that judges have the general duty to follow earlier decisions of their court or higher courts whose rationale, as l

Taking Rights Seriously

政治自由主义 = Political liberalism

Начала политической экономии и податного обложения = The principles of political economy and taxation

https://rangevoting.org/cahier_2013-05.pdf

Who's favored by evaluative voting? An experiment conducted during the 2012 French presidential election

This paper aims to show that, contrary to the standard understanding of his work, Sen's idea of justice does not consist in the defense of a capability theory. Under the dominant capability-centered view, Sen's idea of justice is indeed characterized principally by a switch of focus from utility to capability. We demonstrate that this view amounts to the application of formal welfarism to capabilities. We reject this characterization and defend instead a heuristic account of the status of capability in Sen's thought: capability was introduced to make a point against welfarism, but this does not imply that a commitment to a capability theory. The capability-centered view is shown to be inconsistent with Sen's idea of justice, because the latter requires agents to be involved in the definition of their own welfare. Our study of the status of capability in Sen's view of justice enables us to relocate his main contribution and to build the basis for an alternative theory of justice. Abstract. This paper aims to show that, contrary to the standard understanding of his work, Sen's idea of justice does not consist in the defense of a capability theory. Under the dominant capability-centered view, Sen's idea of justice is indeed characterized principally by a switch of focus from utility to capability. We demonstrate that this view amounts to the application of formal welfarism to capabilities. We reject this characterization and defend instead a heuristic account of the status of capability in Sen's thought: capability was introduced to make a point against welfarism, but this does not imply that a commitment to a capability theory. The capability-centered view is shown to be inconsistent with Sen's idea of justice, because the latter requires agents to be involved in the definition of their own welfare. Our study of the status of capability in Sen's view of justice enables us to relocate his main contribution and to build the basis for an alternative theory of justice.

https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01139118/document

Sen is not a capability theorist

L’experimentation du vote par approbation et du vote par note (2, 1, 0), menee lors du premier tour des elections presidentielles de 2007, vise a etudier l’influence du mode de scrutin sur l’expression des preferences individuelles dans les suffrages. La comparaison des resultats bruts des procedures testees et du vote officiel ouvre des pistes de recherche prometteuses.

Expérimentation du vote par note et du vote par approbation le 22 avril 2007. Premiers résultats

This chapter compares two experimental methodologies for studying how individual voting behavior changes with respect to the choice of voting rule. We concentrate on different versions of Evaluative Voting. The results are based on two types of experimental protocol: a classical laboratory experiment with monetarily-induced preferences, and an in situ experiment run in parallel with the 2012 French presidential election. In the laboratory, individuals use the different rating scales in similar ways; but this is not the case in situ. The difference may be due to the different ways subjects interpret the proposed scales (in particular negative grades) when they concern real candidates. Finally, the chapter discusses what each method can teach us about voter behavior. Notably, we highlight behavior that is in contradiction with the tenets of strict rationality. This phenomenon, which is very widely observed in situ, and where it may be explained by a motive to express oneself, is also observed in the lab, where it is still to be explained.

Individual Behavior Under Evaluative Voting: A Comparison Between Laboratory and In Situ Experiments

A l’occasion du premier tour de l’election presidentielle du 22 avril 2012, les electeurs de trois communes francaises ont ete invites a tester in situ le vote par approbation et le vote par note, selon trois modalites distinctes reparties entre les bureaux experimentes. Cet article a pour objet de presenter les resultats de cette experimentation. Apres correction des biais de participation et de representation, deux enseignements principaux s’en degagent. D’une part, le vote par approbation conduit a un classement des candidats qui differe nettement du scrutin uninominal et, d’autre part, quelle que soit l’echelle de notes retenue, le vote par note tend a accentuer cette divergence.

Antoinette Baujard

Papers

Who's favored by evaluative voting? An experiment conducted during the 2012 French presidential election

Sen is not a capability theorist

Expérimentation du vote par note et du vote par approbation le 22 avril 2007. Premiers résultats

Individual Behavior Under Evaluative Voting: A Comparison Between Laboratory and In Situ Experiments

Vote par approbation, vote par note: Une expérimentation lors de l'élection présidentielle du 22 avril 2012