Ƴancin zaɓi

Daga Wikipedia, Insakulofidiya ta kyauta.
Ƴancin zaɓi

'Yancin zaɓe ya bayyana damammaki da ƴancin kai na mutum don aiwatar da wani aiki da zaia zaɓa daga aƙalla zaɓuɓɓuka biyu da ake da su, ba tare da takura daga ɓangarorin waje ba.[1]

A siyasa[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

A cikin muhawarar zubar da ciki alal misali, kalmar ƴancin zaɓi na iya fitowa don kare matsayin da mace ke da haƙƙin ta yanke cewar ko za ta ci gaba da ciki ko kuma ta zubar. [2][3][4] Hakazalika, wasu batutuwa irin su euthanasia,[5] (kisa mara raɗaɗi na majiyyaci da ke fama da wata cuta mara waraka da raɗaɗi ko kuma a cikin suma da ba za a iya jurewa ba.) alluran rigakafi, hana haihuwa[6] da auren jinsi[7] wani lokaci ana tattauna su dangane da wani haƙƙin mutum da aka ɗauka na “yancin zaɓi”. Wasu batutuwan zamantakewa, misali New York "Soda Ban" an kare su duka biyu[8] kuma sun yi adawa[9] dangane da ƴancin zaɓi.

A fannin tattalin arziƙi[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

'Yancin zaɓi akan wane kamfani da ɗanɗano na soda zaka siya yana da alaƙa da gasar kasuwa

A cikin microeconomics, 'yancin zaɓi shine 'yancin wakilan tattalin arziki don rarraba albarkatun su kamar yadda suka ga dama, a cikin zaɓuɓɓuka (kamar kayayyaki, ayyuka, ko dukiya) waɗanda ke samuwa a gare su.[10][11] Ya haɗa da 'yancin shiga aikin da ake da su.

Ratner et al., A cikin 2008, ya kawo wallafe-wallafen game da 'yancin kai na uban 'yanci wanda ya bayyana cewa masu amfani ba koyaushe suna yin aiki don amfanin kansu ba. Suna danganta wannan al'amari ga abubuwa kamar su motsin rai, gazawar fahimta da son zuciya, da kuma bayanan da ba su cika ba waɗanda suka ce za a iya gyara su ta wasu hanyoyin da aka tsara. Suna tattauna samar da masu amfani da bayanai da kayan aikin yanke shawara, tsarawa da ƙuntata zaɓuɓɓukan kasuwancin su, da kuma bugun motsin rai da sarrafa tsammanin. Kowanne daga cikin waɗannan, in ji su, zai iya inganta ikon masu amfani da su don zaɓar.[12]

Koyaya, 'yancin zaɓe na tattalin arziƙi a ƙarshe ya dogara da gasar kasuwa, tunda akwai zaɓuɓɓukan masu siye galibi sakamakon abubuwa daban-daban ne waɗanda masu siyarwa ke sarrafa su, kamar gabaɗayan ingancin samfur ko sabis da talla . A cikin yanayin da ke akwai, mabukaci ba ya da 'yancin zaɓar siye daga wani furodusa daban. Kamar yadda Friedrich Hayek ya nuna:

ƴancin zaɓe a cikin al'umma mai gasa ya dogara ne akan gaskiyar cewa, idan mutum ɗaya ya ƙi biyan bukatunmu, za mu iya komawa ga wani. Amma idan muka fuskanci mai mulkin mallaka muna cikin cikakkiyar rahamarsa..

— Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, "Can planning free us from care?"[13]

Kamar yadda aka misalta a cikin abin da ke sama, masu tunani masu sassaucin ra'ayi sau da yawa ƙwaƙƙwaran masu ba da shawara ne don haɓaka 'yancin zaɓi. Misali ɗaya na wannan shine littafin Milton Friedman na Kyauta don Zaɓi da jerin talabijin.

Babu yarjejeniya game da ko karuwar 'yancin zaɓe na tattalin arziki yana haifar da karuwar farin ciki. A cikin binciken daya, Rahoton Gidauniyar Heritage Foundation na 2011 Index na 'Yancin Tattalin Arziki ya nuna alaƙa mai ƙarfi tsakanin Ma'anar 'Yancin Tattalin Arziki da farin ciki a cikin ƙasa.[14]

Auna ƴancin zaɓi[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

An yi amfani da hanyar axiomatic - deductive hanya don magance batun auna adadin 'yancin zaɓi (FoC) da mutum yake morewa.[15] A cikin takarda da aka wallafa a 1990, [16][17] Prasanta K. Pattanaik da Yongsheng Xu sun gabatar da dokoki guda uku waɗanda ma'aunin FoC ya kamata ya gamsar:

  1. Rashin sha'awa tsakanin yanayi ba zabi . Samun zaɓi ɗaya kawai ya kai FoC iri ɗaya, komai zaɓin.
  2. Tsananin kadaitaka . Samun zaɓuɓɓuka daban-daban guda biyu x da y sun kai ƙarin FoC fiye da samun zaɓin x kawai.
  3. 'Yanci . Idan yanayin A yana da FoC fiye da B, ta ƙara sabon zaɓi x ga duka biyun (ba a cikin A ko B ba), A zai kasance yana da ƙarin FoC fiye da B.

Sun tabbatar da cewa ma'auni shine kawai ma'auni wanda ya gamsar da waɗannan dokoki, abin da suka lura ya kasance mai ma'ana kuma yana ba da shawarar cewa a sake fasalin ɗaya ko fiye da haka na dokokin. Sun misalta wannan da misalin zaɓin da aka saita "don tafiya ta jirgin ƙasa" ko "tafiya da mota", wanda ya kamata ya samar da ƙarin FoC fiye da zaɓin da aka saita "don tafiya da jan mota" ko "tafiya da mota shuɗi". An ba da wasu shawarwari don magance wannan matsala, ta hanyar sake fasalin dokoki, yawanci ciki har da ra'ayoyin abubuwan da ake so, ko ƙin doka ta uku.[18][19][20] or rejecting the third axiom.[21]

Alaƙa da farin ciki[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Wani bincike na 2006 da Simona Botti da Ann L. McGill ya yi ya nuna cewa, lokacin da aka gabatar da batutuwa tare da zaɓuɓɓuka masu bambanta kuma suna da 'yancin zaɓar tsakanin su, zaɓin su ya inganta gamsuwar su tare da tabbatacce da rashin gamsuwa tare da sakamako mara kyau, dangane da marasa zaɓi.[22]

Wani bincike na 2010 da Hazel Rose Markus da Barry Schwartz suka yi ya tattara jerin gwaje-gwaje game da 'yancin zaɓe kuma sun yi jayayya cewa "zaɓi da yawa na iya haifar da rashin tabbas, damuwa, da son kai".[23] Schwartz ya bayar da hujjar cewa mutane akai-akai suna yin nadama saboda tsadar damar da ba su yanke shawara mafi kyau ba kuma, a wasu yanayi, gamsuwar mutane gabaɗaya a wasu lokuta yakan fi girma idan wani mutum ya yanke shawara mai wahala maimakon ta kansu, ko da lokacin zaɓin ɗayan. ya fi muni. Schwartz ya rubuta littafi kuma ya ba da jawabai yana sukar yawan zaɓi a cikin al'ummar zamani, kodayake ya yarda cewa "wani zaɓi ya fi kowa".[24][25]

Duba kuma[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Manazarta[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

  1. ↑ Sebastiano Bavetta; Pietro Navarra (2011). "5". Index of Economic Freedom (Report). The Heritage Foundation. p. 65. Retrieved February 12, 2013. As noted, there are two aspects of free choice: opportunity to choose and autonomy to choose.a href=“[./Https://www.heritage.org https://www.heritage.org]
  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. ↑ http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Euthanasiaandassistedsuicide/Pages/Arguments.aspx
  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): 237–45. 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. http://reason.com/archives/2012/07/21/fizzy-math 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 9781439038970. Retrieved February 11, 2013.
  11. ↑ Pagoso, Cristobal M.; Dinio, Rosemary P.; Villasis, George A. (1994). Introductory Microeconomics. Rex Bookstore, Inc. p. 15. ISBN 9789712315404. Retrieved February 11, 2013.
  12. ↑ 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.
  13. ↑ Hayek, Friedrich (1994). The Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-32061-8. Retrieved February 15, 2013.
  14. ↑ 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.
  15. ↑ Dowding, Keith; van Hees, Martin (2009). "Chapter 15 – Freedom of Choice" (PDF). Oxford Handbook of Individual and Social Choice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 374–92. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 22, 2012. Retrieved February 15, 2013.
  16. ↑ Pattanaik, Prasanta K.; Xu, Yongsheng (1990). "On ranking opportunity sets in terms of freedom of choice". Recherches Économiques de Louvain / Louvain Economic Review. Department of Economics, Universite Catholique de Louvain via JSTOR. 56 (3–4): 383–90. JSTOR 40723933.
  17. ↑ Xu, Yongsheng (February 2004). "On ranking linear budget sets in terms of freedom of choice". Social Choice and Welfare. 22 (1): 281–89. doi:10.1007/s00355-003-0287-x.
  18. ↑ Sen, Amartya (October 1991). "Welfare, preference and freedom". Journal of Econometrics. 50 (1–2): 15–29. doi:10.1016/0304-4076(91)90087-T.
  19. ↑ Pattanaik, Prasanta K.; Xu, Yongsheng (April 1998). "On preference and freedom". Theory and Decision. 44 (2): 173–98. doi:10.1023/A:1004924211553.
  20. ↑ Sugden, Robert (October 1998). "The metric of opportunity". Economics and Philosophy. 14 (2): 307–37. doi:10.1017/S0266267100003874.
  21. ↑ 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. 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
  22. ↑ Botti, Simona; McGill, Ann L. (2006). "When Choosing is Not Deciding: The Effect Of Perceived Responsibility on Satisfaction". Journal of Consumer Research. 33 (2): 211–19. doi:10.1086/506302. SSRN 1516287.
  23. ↑ Markus, H. R.; Schwartz, B. (2010). "Does Choice Mean Freedom and Well‐Being?". Journal of Consumer Research. 37 (2): 344. doi:10.1086/651242.
  24. ↑ Schwartz, Barry (2005). The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. Harper Perennial. p. 304. ISBN 978-0060005696. S.a. The Paradox of Choice
  25. ↑ Schwartz, Barry (July 2005). "The paradox of choice". Talk. TED. Archived from the original on February 28, 2014. Retrieved February 12, 2013.
Daga "https://ha.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ƴancin_zaɓi&oldid=398045"