首页> 外文期刊>Ecological Economics >The effect of an experimental veil of ignorance on intergenerational resource sharing: empirical evidence from a sequential multi-person dictator game
【24h】

The effect of an experimental veil of ignorance on intergenerational resource sharing: empirical evidence from a sequential multi-person dictator game

机译:实验面纱对非政府性资源共享的影响:来自连续多人独裁者游戏的经验证据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Based on Rawls's Veil, one may question the legitimacy of many decisions made by the currently living where burdens are shifted onto future generations. For Rawls, this is normatively unacceptable: knowing their place in the generational sequence, the current generation fails to decide from an impartial perspective. Starting from this, we conducted a laboratory experiment on intergenerational resource sharing with 310 student participants. One part had to distribute a given endowment over 5 generations in the form of a sequential dictator game. In a second treatment, people could ex-ante agree on a joint distribution; there was no formal enforcement mechanism, and people knew their position in the sequence. The third treatment also included a bargaining stage, but people were ignorant about their later position. As expected, bargaining as such created more equality, but to our surprise, the third treatment produced less egalitarian outcomes than the second one. This is bad news for future generations: If those adversely affected are not identifiable as existing humans, the currently living are less ready to constrain themselves. Generally, our results are more compatible with Adam Smiths empathetic Impartial Spectator, rather than the hypothetical, veiled decision maker a la Rawls.
机译:基于Rawls的面纱,一个人可能会质疑当前生活所做的许多决定的合法性,负担转移到后代。对于罗尔斯来说,这是规范性的,是不可接受的:在代代语中知道他们的位置,当前一代未能从公正的角度决定。从这一点开始,我们在与310名学生参与者共享的代际资源共享进行了实验室实验。一部分必须以顺序独裁游戏的形式分发超过5代的给定捐赠。在第二次治疗中,人们可以进行联合分配达成一致;没有正式的执法机制,人们在序列中了解他们的位置。第三种治疗还包括讨价还价阶段,但人们对他们的后期位置无知。正如预期的那样,讨价还价为这种创造了更多的平等,但对我们的意外,第三种治疗产生了比第二个的更低的平等主义结果。这对后代这是坏消息:如果那些受到不利影响的人不可识别,当前人类不可识别,目前生活不太准备限制自己。一般来说,我们的结果与Adam Smiths的同情幻想观众更符合,而不是假设的遮掩决策制定者A La Rawls。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号