Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1-1-2020

Abstract

At some point in your life, you will need to allocate resources among individuals, but how should you do so? One prominent suggestion is the envy test: the envy test is satisfied when and only when no one prefers someone else’s bundle. In Part I, I explain and then reject Tom Parr’s recent attempt to justify the envy test. Yet, like Parr, I believe the envy test captures something important. Thus, in Part II, I distinguish two approaches to resource allocation. Parr’s defense of the envy test assumes what I will call an individualist approach: what matters are each individual’s preferences. In lieu of the individualist approach, I endorse the solidarity approach: what matters are everyone’s preferences. After explaining the distinction, I show that the envy test—or at least something like it—can be defended using the solidarity approach even if it cannot be defended using the individualist approach.

Share

COinS