Freedom of choice

Last updated

Freedom of choice describes an individual's opportunity and autonomy to perform an action selected from at least two available options, unconstrained by external parties. [1]

Contents

In politics

In the abortion debate, for example, the term "freedom of choice" may emerge in defense of the position that a woman has a right to determine whether she will proceed with or terminate a pregnancy. [2] [3] [4] Similarly, other topics such as euthanasia, [5] vaccination, contraception, [6] and same-sex marriage [7] are sometimes discussed in terms of an assumed individual right of "freedom of choice". Some social issues, for example the New York "Soda Ban" have been both defended [8] and opposed, [9] with reference to "freedom of choice".

In economics

The freedom of choice on which brand and flavor of soda to buy is related to market competition Soft drink shelf 2.jpg
The freedom of choice on which brand and flavor of soda to buy is related to market competition

In microeconomics, freedom of choice is the freedom of economic agents to allocate their resources (such as goods, services, or assets) as they see fit, among the options that are available to them. [10] [11] It includes the freedom to engage in employment available to them. [12]

Ratner et al., in 2008, cite the literature on libertarian paternalism which states that consumers do not always act in their own best interests. They attribute this phenomenon to factors such as emotion, cognitive limitations and biases, and incomplete information - which they state may be remedied by various proposed interventions. They discuss providing consumers with information and decision tools, organizing and restricting their market options, and tapping emotions and managing expectations. Each of these, they state, could improve consumers' ability to choose. [13]

However, economic freedom to choose ultimately depends upon market competition, since buyers' available options are usually the result of various factors controlled by sellers, such as overall quality of a product or a service and advertisement. In the event that a monopoly exists, the consumer no longer has the freedom to choose to buy from a different producer. As Friedrich Hayek pointed out:

Our freedom of choice in a competitive society rests on the fact that, if one person refuses to satisfy our wishes, we can turn to another. But if we face a monopolist we are at his absolute mercy.

—  Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom , "Can planning free us from care?" [14]

As exemplified in the above quote, libertarian thinkers are often strong advocates for increasing freedom of choice. One example of this is Milton Friedman's Free to Choose book and TV series.

There is no consensus as to whether an increase in economic freedom of choice leads to an increase in happiness. In one study, the Heritage Foundation's 2011 Index of Economic Freedom report showed a strong correlation between its Index of Economic Freedom and happiness in a country. [15]

In history

Suzanne K. Becking sees "the freedom to choose" as a fundamental basis of colonisation and national development in North America. [16]

Measuring freedom of choice

The axiomatic-deductive approach found in game theory has been used to address the issue of measuring the amount of freedom of choice (FoC) an individual enjoys. [17] In a 1990 paper, [18] [19] Prasanta K. Pattanaik and Yongsheng Xu presented three conditions that a measurement of FoC should satisfy:

  1. Indifference between no-choice situations. Having only one option amounts to the same FoC, no matter what the option is.
  2. Strict monotonicity. Having two distinct options x and y amounts to more FoC than having only the option x.
  3. Independence. If a situation A has more FoC than B, by adding a new option x to both (not contained in A or B), A will still have more FoC than B.

They proved that the cardinality is the only measurement that satisfies these axioms, which they observed to be counter-intuitive and suggestive that one or more axioms should be reformulated. They illustrated this with the example of the option set "to travel by train" or "to travel by car", that should yield more FoC than the option set "to travel by red car" or "to travel by blue car". Some suggestions have been made to solve this problem, by reformulating the axioms, usually including concepts of preferences, [20] [21] [22] or rejecting the third axiom. [23]

Relationship with happiness

A 2006 study by Simona Botti and Ann L. McGill showed that, when subjects were presented with differentiated options and had the freedom to choose between them, their choice enhanced their satisfaction with positive and dissatisfaction with negative outcomes, relative to nonchoosers. [24]

A 2010 study by Hazel Rose Markus and Barry Schwartz compiled a list of experiments about freedom of choice and argued that "too much choice can produce a paralyzing uncertainty, depression, and selfishness". [25] Schwartz argues that people frequently experience regret due to opportunity costs for not making an optimal decision and that, in some scenarios, people's overall satisfaction are sometimes higher when a difficult decision is made by another person rather than by themselves, even when the other person's choice is worse. Schwartz had written a book and given speeches criticizing the excess of options in modern society, though acknowledging that "some choice is better than none". [26] [27]

See also

Related Research Articles

The Austrian School is a heterodox school of economic thought that advocates strict adherence to methodological individualism, the concept that social phenomena result primarily from the motivations and actions of individuals and their self interest. Austrian school theorists hold that economic theory should be exclusively derived from basic principles of human action.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Friedrich Hayek</span> Austrian-British economist and philosopher (1899–1992)

Friedrich August von Hayek, often referred to by his initials F. A. Hayek, was an Austrian-British polymath, whose areas of interest included economics, political philosophy, psychology, and intellectual history. Hayek shared the 1974 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences with Gunnar Myrdal for work on money and economic fluctuations, and the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena. His account of how prices communicate information is widely regarded as an important contribution to economics that led to him receiving the prize.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Microeconomics</span> Behavior of individuals and firms

Microeconomics is a branch of economics that studies the behavior of individuals and firms in making decisions regarding the allocation of scarce resources and the interactions among these individuals and firms. Microeconomics focuses on the study of individual markets, sectors, or industries as opposed to the national economy as a whole, which is studied in macroeconomics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Milton Friedman</span> American economist and statistician (1912–2006)

Milton Friedman was an American economist and statistician who received the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his research on consumption analysis, monetary history and theory and the complexity of stabilization policy. With George Stigler, Friedman was among the intellectual leaders of the Chicago school of economics, a neoclassical school of economic thought associated with the work of the faculty at the University of Chicago that rejected Keynesianism in favor of monetarism until the mid-1970s, when it turned to new classical macroeconomics heavily based on the concept of rational expectations. Several students, young professors and academics who were recruited or mentored by Friedman at Chicago went on to become leading economists, including Gary Becker, Robert Fogel, and Robert Lucas Jr.

In economics, utility is a measure of the satisfaction that a certain person has from a certain state of the world. Over time, the term has been used in at least two different meanings.

The theory of consumer choice is the branch of microeconomics that relates preferences to consumption expenditures and to consumer demand curves. It analyzes how consumers maximize the desirability of their consumption, by maximizing utility subject to a consumer budget constraint. Factors influencing consumers' evaluation of the utility of goods include: income level, cultural factors, product information and physio-psychological factors.

Economic freedom, or economic liberty, refers to the agency of people to make economic decisions. This is a term used in economic and policy debates as well as in the philosophy of economics. One approach to economic freedom comes from the liberal tradition emphasizing free markets, free trade, and private property. Another approach to economic freedom extends the welfare economics study of individual choice, with greater economic freedom coming from a larger set of possible choices. Other conceptions of economic freedom include freedom from want and the freedom to engage in collective bargaining.

Managerial economics is a branch of economics involving the application of economic methods in the organizational decision-making process. Economics is the study of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. Managerial economics involves the use of economic theories and principles to make decisions regarding the allocation of scarce resources. It guides managers in making decisions relating to the company's customers, competitors, suppliers, and internal operations.

In gambling, economics, and the philosophy of probability, a Dutch book or lock is a set of odds and bets that ensures a guaranteed profit. It is generally used as a thought experiment to motivate Von Neumann–Morgenstern axioms or the axioms of probability by showing they are equivalent to philosophical coherence or Pareto efficiency.

Revealed preference theory, pioneered by economist Paul Anthony Samuelson in 1938, is a method of analyzing choices made by individuals, mostly used for comparing the influence of policies on consumer behavior. Revealed preference models assume that the preferences of consumers can be revealed by their purchasing habits.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capability approach</span> Normative approach to human welfare

The capability approach is a normative approach to human welfare that concentrates on the actual capability of persons to achieve lives they value rather than solely having a right or freedom to do so. It was conceived in the 1980s as an alternative approach to welfare economics.

In microeconomics, search theory studies buyers or sellers who cannot instantly find a trading partner, and must therefore search for a partner prior to transacting. It involves determining the best approach to use when looking for a specific item or person in a sizable, uncharted environment. The goal of the theory is to determine the best search strategy, one that maximises the chance of finding the target while minimising search-related expenses.

<i>The Paradox of Choice</i> 2004 book by Barry Schwartz

The Paradox of Choice – Why More Is Less is a book written by American psychologist Barry Schwartz and first published in 2004 by Harper Perennial. In the book, Schwartz argues that eliminating consumer choices can greatly reduce anxiety for shoppers. The book analyses the behavior of different types of people. This book argues that the dramatic explosion in choice—from the mundane to the profound challenges of balancing career, family, and individual needs—has paradoxically become a problem instead of a solution and how our obsession with choice encourages us to seek that which makes us feel worse.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kotaro Suzumura</span> Japanese economist (1944–2020)

Kotaro Suzumura was a Japanese economist and professor emeritus of Hitotsubashi University and Waseda University. He graduated from Hitotsubashi University in 1966. His research interests were in social choice theory and welfare economics. He was also a Fellow of the Econometric Society. He was named a Person of Cultural Merit in 2017.

In social choice theory, a dictatorship mechanism is a rule by which, among all possible alternatives, the results of voting mirror a single pre-determined person's preferences, without consideration of the other voters. Dictatorship by itself is not considered a good mechanism in practice, but it is theoretically important: by Arrow's impossibility theorem, when there are at least three alternatives, dictatorship is the only ranked voting electoral system that satisfies unrestricted domain, Pareto efficiency, and independence of irrelevant alternatives. Similarly, by Gibbard's theorem, when there are at least three alternatives, dictatorship is the only strategyproof rule.

Choice architecture is the design of different ways in which choices can be presented to decision makers, and the impact of that presentation on decision-making. For example, each of the following:

In economics, and in other social sciences, preference refers to an order by which an agent, while in search of an "optimal choice", ranks alternatives based on their respective utility. Preferences are evaluations that concern matters of value, in relation to practical reasoning. Individual preferences are determined by taste, need, ..., as opposed to price, availability or personal income. Classical economics assumes that people act in their best (rational) interest. In this context, rationality would dictate that, when given a choice, an individual will select an option that maximizes their self-interest. But preferences are not always transitive, both because real humans are far from always being rational and because in some situations preferences can form cycles, in which case there exists no well-defined optimal choice. An example of this is Efron dice.

In psychology, economics and philosophy, preference is a technical term usually used in relation to choosing between alternatives. For example, someone prefers A over B if they would rather choose A than B. Preferences are central to decision theory because of this relation to behavior. Some methods such as Ordinal Priority Approach use preference relation for decision-making. As connative states, they are closely related to desires. The difference between the two is that desires are directed at one object while preferences concern a comparison between two alternatives, of which one is preferred to the other.

Prasanta Kumar Pattanaik, is an Indian-American emeritus professor at the Department of Economics at the University of California. He is a Fellow of the Econometric Society.

Shatakshee Ramesh Dhongde is an associate professor at the School of Economics, Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts, Georgia Institute of Technology. She has provided research papers to the several institutions including the International Monetary Fund and the World Institute for Development Economics Research (WIDER). Her work has also appeared in several academic journals including World Development.

References

  1. ↑ Bavetta, Sebastiano; Navarra, Pietro (2011). "Chapter 5". Index of Economic Freedom (Report). The Heritage Foundation. p. 65. Archived from the original on December 9, 2019. Retrieved February 12, 2013. As noted, there are two aspects of free choice: opportunity to choose and autonomy to choose.
  2. ↑ "BBC – Arguments in favour of abortion" . Retrieved February 12, 2013. This leads some people to claim is that it is unethical to ban abortion because doing so denies freedom of choice to women and forces 'the unwilling to bear the unwanted'.
  3. ↑ "Freedom of Choice Act – H.R.1964". Archived from the original on January 25, 2016. Retrieved February 13, 2013. Freedom of Choice Act – Declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to: (1) bear a child; (2) terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or (3) terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.
  4. ↑ Susan Smalley (January 10, 2008). "Eggs And Abortion: Freedom Of Choice". Huffington Post. Retrieved February 13, 2013.
  5. ↑ "Euthanasia and assisted suicide – Arguments". NHS. Retrieved February 12, 2013.
  6. ↑ Serfaty, D. (1999). "Guaranteeing freedom of choice in matters of contraception and abortion in Europe: Some personal remarks". The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care. 4 (4): 237–245. doi:10.3109/13625189909071344. PMID   10817094.
  7. ↑ Menachem Rosensaft (January 15, 2009). "Even Same-Sex Marriage Is a Basic Civil Right". Huffington Post. Retrieved February 12, 2013.
  8. ↑ Lauren Hunter; Kristin Van Busum (September 21, 2012). "Soda "Ban" May Actually Increase Freedom of Choice". Huffington Post. Retrieved February 12, 2013.
  9. ↑ Baylen Linnekin (21 July 2012). "The Fizzy Math Behind Bloomberg's Soda Ban". reason.com. Retrieved February 12, 2013. First, the ban would restrict food freedom of choice.
  10. ↑ Hall, Robert E.; Lieberman, Marc (2009). Microeconomics: Principles & Applications. Cengage Learning. p. 42. ISBN   978-1439038970 . Retrieved February 11, 2013.
  11. ↑ Pagoso, Cristobal M.; Dinio, Rosemary P.; Villasis, George A. (1994). Introductory Microeconomics. Rex Bookstore, Inc. p. 15. ISBN   978-9712315404 . Retrieved February 11, 2013.
  12. ↑ "Quizlet Microeconomics, Chapter 04 – The Market System" . Retrieved February 11, 2013.
  13. ↑ Ratner, R. K.; Soman, D.; Zauberman, G.; Ariely, D.; Carmon, Z.; Keller, P. A.; Kim, B. K.; Lin, F.; Malkoc, S.; Small, D. A.; Wertenbroch, K. (2008). "How behavioral decision research can enhance consumer welfare: From freedom of choice to paternalistic intervention". Marketing Letters. 19 (3–4): 383. doi:10.1007/s11002-008-9044-3. S2CID   5880506.
  14. ↑ Hayek, Friedrich (1994). The Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago Press. ISBN   978-0226320618 . Retrieved February 15, 2013.
  15. ↑ Sebastiano Bavetta; Pietro Navarra (2011). "5". Index of Economic Freedom (Report). The Heritage Foundation. pp. 61–68. Archived from the original on December 9, 2019. Retrieved February 12, 2013.
  16. ↑ Becking, Suzanne K. (2 September 2014). "Christianity". In Coleman, Marilyn J.; Ganong, Lawrence H. (eds.). The Social History of the American Family: An Encyclopedia. Vol. 1 (revised ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. p. 233. ISBN   9781452286150 . Retrieved 5 January 2024. It is commonly believed that the early settlers came to America to experience freedom from religious persecution, and although that proved true for many groups, what brought the early explorers to America was a combination of spreading the Gospel and finding spices, gold, and an opportunity for trade. England began sending settlers to clear the land and make way for an expanded English empire. However, the settlers moved in a different direction, and a new nation was born, With a few notable exceptions, the settlers were free to live and worship as they pleased, thus paving the way for a nation based on the freedom to choose.
  17. ↑ Dowding, Keith; van Hees, Martin (2009). "Chapter 15 – Freedom of Choice" (PDF). Oxford Handbook of Individual and Social Choice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 374–392. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 22, 2012. Retrieved February 15, 2013.
  18. ↑ Pattanaik, Prasanta K.; Xu, Yongsheng (1990). "On ranking opportunity sets in terms of freedom of choice". Recherches Économiques de Louvain / Louvain Economic Review. 56 (3–4). Department of Economics, Universite Catholique de Louvain via JSTOR: 383–390. doi:10.1017/S0770451800043955. JSTOR   40723933. S2CID   153418558.
  19. ↑ Xu, Yongsheng (February 2004). "On ranking linear budget sets in terms of freedom of choice". Social Choice and Welfare. 22 (1): 281–289. doi:10.1007/s00355-003-0287-x. S2CID   26796101.
  20. ↑ Sen, Amartya (October 1991). "Welfare, preference and freedom". Journal of Econometrics. 50 (1–2): 15–29. doi:10.1016/0304-4076(91)90087-T.
  21. ↑ Pattanaik, Prasanta K.; Xu, Yongsheng (April 1998). "On preference and freedom". Theory and Decision. 44 (2): 173–198. doi:10.1023/A:1004924211553. S2CID   117801220.
  22. ↑ Sugden, Robert (October 1998). "The metric of opportunity". Economics and Philosophy. 14 (2): 307–337. doi:10.1017/S0266267100003874. S2CID   154300347.
  23. ↑ Carter, Ian (February 2004). "Choice, freedom, and freedom of choice". Social Choice and Welfare. 22 (1): 61–81. doi:10.1007/s00355-003-0277-z. S2CID   32673348. an explication of freedom of choice should reject the third axiom [...] A person has freedom of choice iff she lacks constraints on the reasoned selection and performance of one or more of the items on an action-menu." and "(...) where a selection is necessarily made from a set of items greater than one
  24. ↑ Botti, Simona; McGill, Ann L. (2006). "When Choosing is Not Deciding: The Effect Of Perceived Responsibility on Satisfaction". Journal of Consumer Research. 33 (2): 211–219. doi:10.1086/506302. S2CID   145266845. SSRN   1516287.
  25. ↑ Markus, H. R.; Schwartz, B. (2010). "Does Choice Mean Freedom and Well‐Being?". Journal of Consumer Research. 37 (2): 344. doi:10.1086/651242. S2CID   15205215.
  26. ↑ Schwartz, Barry (2005). The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. Harper Perennial. p.  304. ISBN   978-0060005696. S.a. The Paradox of Choice
  27. ↑ Schwartz, Barry (July 2005). "The paradox of choice". Talk. TED. Archived from the original on February 28, 2014. Retrieved February 12, 2013.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.