×

zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Sustainable recursive social welfare functions. (English) Zbl 1277.91051
Summary: What ethical criterion for intergenerational justice should be adopted, e.g., when faced with the task of managing the global environment? Koopmans’ axiomatization of discounted utilitarianism is based on seemingly compelling conditions, yet this criterion leads to hard-to-justify outcomes. The present analysis considers a class of sustainable recursive social welfare functions within Koopmans’ general framework. This class is axiomatized by means of a weak equity condition (“Hammond equity for the future”) and general existence is established. Any member of the class satisfies the key axioms of Chichilnisky’s “sustainable preferences”. The analysis singles out one of Koopmans’ original separability conditions (his Postulate 3’a), here called “independent present”, as particularly questionable from an ethical perspective.

MSC:
91B15 Welfare economics
91B08 Individual preferences
PDF BibTeX XML Cite
Full Text: DOI
References:
[1] Alcantud J.C.R., García-Sanz M.D.: Paretian evaluation of infinite utility streams: an egalitarian criterion. Econ Lett 106, 209–211 (2010) · Zbl 1203.91073 · doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2009.11.021
[2] Arrow K.J.: Social Choice and Individual Values. Wiley, New York (1951) · Zbl 0984.91513
[3] Asheim G.B.: Unjust intergenerational allocations. J Econ Theory 54, 350–371 (1991) · Zbl 0733.90007 · doi:10.1016/0022-0531(91)90127-P
[4] Asheim G.B., Mitra T.: Sustainability and discounted utilitarianism in models of economic growth. Math Soc Sci 59, 148–169 (2010) · Zbl 1202.91194 · doi:10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2009.08.003
[5] Asheim, G.B., Mitra, T., Tungodden, B: A new equity condition for infinite utility streams and the possibility of being Paretian. In: Roemer, J., Suzumura, K. (eds.) Intergenerational Equity and Sustainability, pp. 55–68. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan (2007)
[6] Asheim G.B., Tungodden B.: Resolving distributional conflicts between generations. Econ Theory 24, 221–230 (2004a) · Zbl 1084.91052 · doi:10.1007/s00199-003-0412-1
[7] Asheim, G.B., Tungodden, B.: Do Koopmans’ postulates lead to discounted utilitarianism? Discussion Paper 32/04, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration (2004b)
[8] Atkinson A.B.: The strange disappearance of welfare economics. Kyklos 54, 193–206 (2001)
[9] Banerjee K.: On the equity-efficiency trade off in aggregating infinite utility streams. Econ Lett 93, 63–67 (2006) · Zbl 1254.91134 · doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2006.03.041
[10] Basu K., Mitra T.: Aggregating infinite utility streams with intergenerational equity: the impossibility of being Paretian. Econometrica 32, 1557–1563 (2003) · Zbl 1153.91648 · doi:10.1111/1468-0262.00458
[11] Basu K., Mitra T.: Utilitarianism for infinite utility streams: a new welfare criterion and its axiomatic characterization. J Econ Theory 133, 350–373 (2007) · Zbl 1280.91062 · doi:10.1016/j.jet.2005.11.003
[12] Birchenhall C.R., Grout P.: On equal plans with an infinite horizon. J Econ Theory 21, 249–264 (1979) · Zbl 0445.90021 · doi:10.1016/0022-0531(79)90030-9
[13] Blackorby C., Donaldson D., Weymark J.A.: Social choice with interpersonal utility comparisons: a diagrammatic introduction. Int Econ Rev 25, 327–356 (1984) · Zbl 0543.90005 · doi:10.2307/2526200
[14] Bleichrodt H., Rohde K.I.M., Wakker P.P.: Koopmans’ constant discounting for intertemporal choice: A simplification and a generalization. J Math Psych 52, 341–347 (2008) · Zbl 1152.91452 · doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2008.05.003
[15] Bossert W., Sprumont Y., Suzumura K.: Ordering infinite utility streams. J Econ Theory 135, 579–589 (2007) · Zbl 1186.91086 · doi:10.1016/j.jet.2006.03.005
[16] Burniaux, J.-M., Martins, J.O.: Carbon leakages: A general equilibrium view. Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1276.91081
[17] Chichilnisky G.: An axiomatic approach to sustainable development. Soc Choice Welfare 13, 231–257 (1996) · Zbl 0846.90005 · doi:10.1007/BF00183353
[18] Chichilnisky, G.: Sustainable markets with short sales. Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1277.91120
[19] Chichilnisky G., Heal G.M., Beltratti A.: The green golden rule. Econ Lett 49, 175–179 (1995) · Zbl 0900.90122 · doi:10.1016/0165-1765(95)00662-Y
[20] Chipman, J.S., Tian, G.: Detrimental externalities, pollution rights, and the ”Coase Theorem”. Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1276.91082
[21] Dasgupta, P.S., Heal, G.M.: The optimal depletion of exhaustible resources. Rev Econ Stud (Symposium) 3–28 (1974) · Zbl 0304.90018
[22] Dasgupta P.S., Heal G.M.: Economic Theory and Exhaustible Resources. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1979) · Zbl 0421.90004
[23] Debreu G.: Topological methods in cardinal utility theory. In: Arrow, K.J., Karlin, S., Suppes, P. (eds) Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences, pp. 16–26. Stanford University Press, Stanford (1960)
[24] Diamond P.: The evaluation of infinite utility streams. Econometrica 33, 170–177 (1965) · Zbl 0127.36602 · doi:10.2307/1911893
[25] Dutta, P.K., Radner, R.: Capital growth in a global warming model: Will China and India sign a climate treaty? Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1276.91083
[26] Figuieres, C., Tidball, M.: Sustainable exploitation of a natural resource: a satisfying use of Chichilnisky’s criterion. Econ Theory (this issue) (2010)
[27] Fleurbaey M., Michel P.: Transfer principles and inequality aversion, with application to optimal growth. Math Soc Sci 42, 1–11 (2001) · Zbl 0980.91060 · doi:10.1016/S0165-4896(01)00066-X
[28] Fleurbaey M., Michel P.: Intertemporal equity and the extension of the Ramsey criterion. J Math Econ 39, 777–802 (2003) · Zbl 1046.91104 · doi:10.1016/S0304-4068(03)00054-5
[29] Gorman W.M.: Conditions for additive separability. Econometrica 36, 605–609 (1968a) · Zbl 0165.23104 · doi:10.2307/1909527
[30] Gorman W.M.: The structure of utility functions. Rev Econ Stud 35, 367–390 (1968b) · Zbl 0217.26801 · doi:10.2307/2296766
[31] Hammond P.J.: Equity, Arrow’s conditions and Rawls’ difference principle. Econometrica 44, 793–804 (1976) · Zbl 0331.90015 · doi:10.2307/1913445
[32] Hara C., Shinotsuka T., Suzumura K., Xu Y.: Continuity and egalitarianism in the evaluation of infinite utility streams. Soc Choice Welfare 31, 179–191 (2008) · Zbl 1163.91347 · doi:10.1007/s00355-007-0275-7
[33] Heal G.M.: Valuing the future: Economic theory and sustainability. Columbia University Press, New York (1998)
[34] Heal G.M.: Intergenerational welfare economics and the environment. In: Mäler, K.-G., Vincent, J. (eds) Handbook of Environmental Economics, North-Holland, Amsterdam (2005)
[35] Karp, C., Zhang, J.: Taxes versus quantities for a stock pollutant with endogenous abatement costs and asymmetric information. Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1276.91084
[36] Koopmans T.C.: Stationary ordinal utility and impatience. Econometrica 28, 287–309 (1960) · Zbl 0149.38401 · doi:10.2307/1907722
[37] Koopmans, T.C.: Intertemporal distribution and optimal aggregate economic growth. In: Ten Economic Studies in the Tradition of Irving Fisher. New York: Wiley (1967)
[38] Koopmans, T.C.: Representation of preference orderings with independent components of consumption. In: McGuire, C.B., Radner, R. (eds.) Decision and Organization: A Volume in Honor of Jacob Marschak, 2nd edn, pp. 57–78 [previously published in 1972]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press (1986a)
[39] Koopmans, T.C.: Representation of preference orderings over time. In: McGuire, C.B., Radner, R. (eds.) Decision and Organization: A Volume in Honor of Jacob Marschak, 2nd edn, pp. 57–78 [previously published in 1972]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press (1986b)
[40] Koopmans T.C., Diamond P.E., Williamson R.E.: Stationary utility and time perspective. Econometrica 32, 82–100 (1964) · Zbl 0131.18603 · doi:10.2307/1913736
[41] Krautkraemer J.A.: Optimal growth, resource amenities and the preservation of natural environments. Rev Econ Stud 52, 153–170 (1985) · Zbl 0547.90024 · doi:10.2307/2297476
[42] Lauwers L.: Rawlsian equity and generalised utilitarianism with an infinite population. Econ Theory 9, 143–150 (1997) · Zbl 0872.90007 · doi:10.1007/BF01213448
[43] Lauwers L.: Intertemporal objective functions: Strong Pareto versus anonymity. Math Soc Sci 35, 37–55 (1998) · Zbl 0926.91015 · doi:10.1016/S0165-4896(97)00022-X
[44] Lauwers, L.: Intergenerational equity, efficiency, and constructibility. Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1276.91089
[45] Lecocq, F., Hourcade, J.-C.: Insights from a theoretical analysis of negotiation mandates: Unspoken ethical issues in the climate affair. Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1277.91144
[46] Mitra T.: Stationary Paretian SWF: An Example. Cornell University, Mimeo (2008)
[47] Ostrom, E.: Nested externalities and polycentric institutions: must we wait for global solutions to climate change before taking actions at other scales? Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1276.91086
[48] Rawls J.: A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1971)
[49] Rezai, A., Foley, D.K., Taylor, L.: Global warming and economic externalities. Econ Theory (this issue) (2010) · Zbl 1277.91135
[50] Solow, R.M.: Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources. Rev Econ Stud (Symposium), 29–45 (1974) · Zbl 0304.90019
[51] Svensson L.-G.: Equity among generations. Econometrica 48, 1251–1256 (1980) · Zbl 0436.90029 · doi:10.2307/1912181
[52] Szpilrajn E.: Sur l’extension du l’ordre partiel. Fundam Math 16, 386–389 (1930) · JFM 56.0843.02
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.