Measures of inequality aversion are elicited using hypothetical decision tasks. The tasks require an assessment of projects in the presence of environmental inequalities across space and time. We also test the effect of different environmental domains (air pollution, recreational forest and soil fertility) and contextual framings (gain/loss, within/between regions and present–future/past–present inter-temporal trade-offs). Estimated mean inequality aversion is higher in the intra-temporal framing (an elasticity of 2.9), than in the inter-temporal framing with either negative (2.0) or positive (1.4) growth in environmental quality. Differences across environmental domains exist but are less pronounced. Similar results hold for pure time preference. Losses are associated with a lower pure rate of time preference but higher inequality aversion compared to gains. The results indicate how domain-specific ‘dual’ discount rates or rather changing relative shadow prices for the environment might be calibrated. Yet, seen as an exercise in empirical social choice, the context dependent results reject the classical Utilitarian formulation of a single Ramsey Rule.

不平等厌恶的度量是使用假设的决策任务得出的。这些任务需要在存在跨空间和时间的环境不平等的情况下对项目进行评估。我们还测试了不同环境领域（空气污染、休闲森林和土壤肥力）和背景框架（收益/损失、区域内/区域之间以及现在-未来/过去-现在的跨期权衡）的影响。在环境质量负增长 (2.0) 或正 (1.4) 增长的跨期框架中，估计的平均不平等厌恶在时间内框架（弹性为 2.9）中更高。环境领域之间存在差异，但不那么明显。类似的结果适用于纯时间偏好。与收益相比，损失与较低的纯时间偏好率相关，但与更高的不平等厌恶相关。结果表明如何校准特定领域的“双重”折扣率或环境的相对影子价格。然而，被视为经验社会选择的练习，依赖于上下文的结果拒绝了单一拉姆齐规则的经典功利主义表述。