The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Measurement
Open accessAbstract
During the last third of the twentieth century, political philosophers actively debated about the content of distributive justice; the ruling ethical view of utilitarianism was challenged by various versions of equality of opportunities. Economists formulated several ways of modeling these ideas, focusing upon how individuals are placed with respect to opportunities for achieving various outcomes, and what compensation is due to individuals with truncated opportunities. After presenting a review of the main philosophical ideas (section 2), we turn to economic models (sections 3 and 4). We propose a reformulation of the definition of economic development, replacing the utilitarian measure of GDP per capita with a measure of the degree to which opportunities for income acquisition in a nation have been equalized. Finally, we discuss issues that the econometrician faces in measuring inequality of opportunity, briefly review the empirical literature (section 6), and conclude (section 7). (JEL C43, D63, D70, I24)
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(2012) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.102.7.i · Cited by 6,810
Justice as Fairness: A Restatement
Rawls, J. (2001) · doi:10.2307/j.ctv31xf5v0 · Cited by 5,761
Rawls, J. (1958) · The Philosophical Review · doi:10.2307/2182612 · Cited by 5,565
(2000) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511563836 · Cited by 3,562
What Is the Point of Equality?
Anderson, E. S. (1999) · Ethics · doi:10.1086/233897 · Cited by 3,095
On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice
Cohen, G. A. (1989) · Ethics · doi:10.1086/293126 · Cited by 2,917
How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement
Jensen, A. (1969) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.39.1.l3u15956627424k7 · Cited by 2,907 · cited 1×
“Jensen (1969) and Herrnstein (1971) proposed that inequality was in the main due to differential intelligence (IQ), and so equalizing opportunities (for instance, through compensatory education of under-privileged children) would fail to generate substantially greater equality of outcomes.”
BackgroundEquality and equal opportunity for welfare
Arneson, R. J. (1989) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1007/bf00646210 · Cited by 1,970
The Class of Additively Decomposable Inequality Measures
Shorrocks, A. F. (1980) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913126 · Cited by 1,721
Decomposition procedures for distributional analysis: a unified framework based on the Shapley value
Shorrocks, A. F. (2013) · The Journal of Economic Inequality · doi:10.1007/s10888-011-9214-z · Cited by 1,190
Cited by
Björklund, A., & Jäntti, M. (2020) · Research in Social Stratification and Mobility · doi:10.1016/j.rssm.2019.100455 · Cited by 78
Estimating Intergenerational and Assortative Processes in Extended Family Data
Collado, M. D., Ortuño-Ortín, I., & Stuhler, J. (2023) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1093/restud/rdac060 · Cited by 41
Metadata
- Authors
- Roemer, J. E., & Trannoy, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Economic Literature
- Publisher
- American Economic Association
- Published
- 2016-12-01
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1288-1332
- ISSN
- 0022-0515 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2563162365
- Cited by
- 398
- References
- 51
- FWCI
- 58.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Measurement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1257/jel.20151206
- The paper
- Roemer, J. E., & Trannoy, A. (2016). Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Measurement. Journal of Economic Literature. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20151206
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.