Working Papers in Economics,
University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics

Abstract: Multidimensional welfare analysis has recently been revived by money-metric measures based on explicit fairness principles and the respect of individual preferences. To operationalize this approach, preference heterogeneity can be inferred from the observation of individual choices (revealed preferences) or from self-declared satisfaction following these choices (subjective well-being). We question whether using one or the other method makesa difference for welfare analysis based on income-leisure preferences. We estimate ordinal preferences that are either consistent with actual labor supply decisions or with income-leisure satisfaction. For different ethical priors regarding work preferences, we compare the welfare rankings obtained with both methods. The correlation in welfare ranks is high in general and very high for the 60% of the population whose actual choices coincide with subjective well-being maximization. For the rest, most of the discrepancies seem to be explained by labor market constraints among the low skilled and underemployment among low-educated single mothers. Importantly from a Rawlsian perspective, the identification of the worst off depends on ethical views regarding responsibility for work preferences and the extent to which actual choices are constrained on the labor market.

Keywords: fair allocation; money metric; decision utility; experienc edutility; labor supply; subjective well-being

JEL-codes: C35; C90; D60; D63; D71; H24; H31; J22

707 pages, September 2017

Full text files

53738 HTML file 

Download statistics

• University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics
• Ordering Working Papers
• Home page for this series

Questions (including download problems) about the papers in this series should be directed to Ann-Christin Räätäri Nyström ()
Report other problems with accessing this service to Sune Karlsson ().

This page generated on 2024-02-05 17:11:23.