Evaluations of infinite utility streams: Pareto-efficient and egalitarian axiomatics

Alcantud, José Carlos R. and García-Sanz, María D. (2010): Evaluations of infinite utility streams: Pareto-efficient and egalitarian axiomatics.

Abstract

Two factors influence the resolution of the conflict among infinite generations: the consistency/ethical postulates requested; and the utilities that each generation can possess. We contribute to qualifying the Basu-Mitra approach to this problem, that concerns social welfare functions. Firstly we examine efficiency and strengthened forms of Hammond Equity for the Future both when the feasible utilities are [0,1] and natural numbers. This complements Banerjee (Economics Letters, 2006) and Alcantud and Garcia- Sanz (Economics Letters, 2010). Secondly, we analyze the possibility of combining Pareto-efficiency and the spirit of the Hammond Equity principle for both specfications of the feasible utilities. Here the case study is richer since we analyze four different versions of this principle. We conclude that the Anonymity, Hammond Equity for the Future, and Hammond Equity ethics can be combined with weak specifications of the Pareto postulate at a time even through explicit social welfare functions.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Social welfare function; Equity; Pareto axiom; intergenerational justice
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D71 - Social Choice ; Clubs ; Committees ; Associations; D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement; D - Microeconomics > D9 - Intertemporal Choice > D90 - General

References

Alcantud, J.C.R. and Garcia-Sanz, M.D. (2010): Paretian evaluation of infinite utility streams: an egalitarian criterion. Forthcoming in Economics Letters.

Asheim, G. B. and Tungodden, B. (2004a): Do Koopmans’ postulates lead to discounted utilitarianism?. Discussion paper 32/04, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration.

Asheim, G. B. and Tungodden, B. (2004b): Resolving distributional conflicts between generations, Economic Theory 24, 221-230.

Asheim, G.B., Bossert, W., Sprumont, Y. and Suzumura, K. (2006): Infinite-horizon choice functions, CIREQ, working paper no. 05-2006.

Asheim, G. B., Mitra, T. and Tungodden, B. (2006): Sustainable recursive social welfare functions. No 18/2006, Memorandum from Oslo University, Department of Economics.

Asheim, G. B., Mitra, T. and Tungodden, B. (2007): A new equity condition for infinite utility streams and the possibility of being Paretian. In: Roemer, J., Suzumura, K. (Eds.), Intergenerational Equity and Sustainability: Conference Proceedings of the IWEA Roundtable Meeting on Intergenerational Equity (Palgrave).

d’Aspremont, C. and Gevers, L. (1977): Equity and the informational basis of collective choice. Review of Economic Studies 44, 199-209.

Banerjee, K. (2006): On the equity-efficiency trade off in aggregating infinite utility streams. Economics Letters 93, 63-67.

Basu, K. and Mitra, T. (2003): Aggregating infinite utility streams with intergenerational equity: the impossibility of being paretian. Econometrica 71, 1557-1563.

Basu, K. and Mitra, T. (2007): Possibility theorems for aggregating infinite utility streams equitably. In: Roemer, J., Suzumura, K. (Eds.), Intergenerational Equity and Sustainability: Conference Proceedings of the IWEA Roundtable Meeting on Intergenerational Equity (Palgrave).

Bossert, W., Sprumont, Y. and Suzumura, K. (2007): Ordering infinite utility streams. Journal of Economic Theory 135, 579-589.

Bridges, D. S. and Mehta, G. B. (1996): Representations of Preference Orderings. (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg–Berlin-New York).

Diamond, P. A. (1965): The evaluation of infinite utility streams. Econometrica 33, 170-177.

Epstein, L.G. (1986): Intergenerational Preference Orderings. Social Choice and Welfare 3, 151-160.

Fleurbaey, M. and Michel, P. (2003): Intertemporal equity and the extension of the Ramsey principle. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 39, 777-802. Hammond, P.J. (1976): Equity, Arrow’s conditions and Rawls’ difference principle. Econometrica 44, 793-804.

Koopmans, T.C. (1960): Stationary ordinal utility and impatience. Econometrica 28, 287-309.

Lauwers, L. (1997): Rawlsian equity and generalized utilitarianism with an infinite population. Economic Theory 9, 143-150.

Lauwers, L. (1998): Intertemporal objective functions: strong Pareto versus anonymity. Mathematical Social Sciences 35, 37-55.

Lauwers, L. (2010): Ordering infinite utility streams comes at the cost of a non-Ramsey set. Forthcoming in Journal of Mathematical Economics.

Lombardi, M. and Veneziani, R. (2009): Liberal egalitarianism and the Harm Principle. Working Paper No. 649, Department of Economics, Queen Mary (University of London).

Lombardi, M. and Veneziani, R. (2009a): Liberal egalitarianism and the Harm Principle. Working Paper No. 649, Department of Economics, Queen Mary (University of London).

Lombardi, M. and Veneziani, R. (2009b): Liberal principles for social welfare relations in infinitely-lived societies. Working Paper No. 650, Department of Economics, Queen Mary (University of London).

Mariotti, M. and Veneziani, R. (2009): ‘Non-interference’ implies equality. Social Choice and Welfare 32, 123-128.

Mitra, T. and Basu, K. (2007): On the existence of Paretian social welfare relations for infinite utility streams with extended anonymity. In: Roemer, J., Suzumura, K. (Eds.), Intergenerational Equity and Sustainability: Conference Proceedings of the IWEA Roundtable Meeting on Intergenerational Equity (Palgrave).

Ramsey, F. P. (1928) A mathematical theory of savings. Economic Journal 38, 543-559.

Sakai, T. (2003): Intergenerational preferences and sensitivity to the present. Economics Bulletin 4, 1-6.

Sakai, T. (2006): Equitable intergenerational preferences on restricted domains. Social Choice and Welfare 27, 41-54.

Sakai, T. (2008): Intergenerational equity and an explicit construction of welfare criteria. Mimeo.

Shinotsuka, T. (1998): Equity, continuity and myopia: A generalization of Diamond’s impossibility theorem. Social Choice and Welfare 15, 21-30.

Suzumura, K. and Shinotsuka, T. (2007): On the possibility of continuous, Paretian and egalitarian evaluation of infinite utility streams. Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Research Paper Series. Working Paper 07-12 2007.

Svensson, L.G. (1980): Equity among generations, Econometrica 48, 1251- 1256.

Zame, W. R. (2007): Can intergenerational equity be operationalized?, Theoretical Economics 2, 187-202.