 Assignments with Ethical ConcernsNo CARF-F-514, CARF F-Series from Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo Abstract: This study investigates an axiomatic approach to in-kind assignment problems with a single-unit demand such as triage. We consider multiple ethical criteria regarding which agents should be assigned that conflict with one another. To make compromises between criteria, we introduce two methods for configuring social choice rules that map from various problems to agents who are assigned slots: the method of procedure and the method of aggregation. From inter-problem regularities, we demonstrate characterization results, implying that the method of procedure emphasizes consistent respect for individual criteria across problems, whereas the method of aggregation emphasizes consistent respect for individual agents across problems. These methods are incompatible because only ethical dictatorships are induced by both methods. We show that the method of aggregation is superior when we can utilize detailed information about ethical concerns such as cardinality and comparability, while the method of procedure is superior when there are severe informational limitations. Pages: 40 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cfi:fseres:cf514 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in CARF F-Series from Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.