Liberal approaches to ranking infinite utility streams: When can we avoid interferences?

Alcantud, José Carlos R. (2011): Liberal approaches to ranking infinite utility streams: When can we avoid interferences?

Abstract

In this work we analyse social welfare relations on sets of infinite utility streams that verify various types of liberal non-interference principles. Earlier contributions have established that (finitely) anonymous and strongly Paretian quasiorderings exist that agree with axioms of that kind together with weak preference continuity and further consistency. Nevertheless Mariotti and Veneziani prove that a fully liberal non-interfering view of a finite society leads to dictatorship if weak Pareto optimality is imposed. We first prove that extending the horizon to infinity produces a reversal of such impossibility result. Then we investigate a related problem: namely, the possibility of combining “standard” semicontinuity with efficiency in the presence of non-interference. We provide several impossibility results that prove that there is a generalised incompatibility between continuity and non-interference principles, both under ordinal and cardinal views of the problem. Our analysis ends with some insights on the property of representability in the presence of non-interference assumptions. In particular we prove that all social welfare functions that verify a very mild efficiency property must exert some interference (penalising both adverse and favorable changes) on the affairs of particular generations.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Pareto axiom; Intergenerational justice; Social welfare relation; Non-interference; Continuity
• 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

J.C.R. Alcantud, M.D. Garcia-Sanz, Evaluations of infinite utility streams: Pareto-efficient and egalitarian axiomatics, MPRA Paper No. 20133 (2010), http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/20133/

G.B. Asheim, T. Mitra, B. Tungodden, Sustainable recursive social welfare functions, Econ Theory, forthcoming.

G.B. Asheim, B. Tungodden, Resolving distributional conflicts between generations, Econ. Theory 24 (2004), 221-230.

C. d’Aspremont, Axioms for Social Welfare Orderings, in: L. Hurwicz, D. Schmeidler, H. Sonnenschein (Eds.), Social Goals and Social Organization: Essays in Memory of Elisha Pazner, Cambridge University Press, 1985.

K. Basu, T. Mitra, Possibility theorems for equitably aggregating infinite utility streams, in: J. Roemer, K. Suzumura (Eds.), Intergenerational Equity and Sustainability: Conference Proceedings of the IWEA Roundtable Meeting on Intergenerational Equity, Palgrave, 2007, pp. 69-84.

W. Bossert, Y. Sprumont, K. Suzumura, Ordering infinite utility streams, J. Econ. Theory 135 (2007), 579-589.

G. Chichilnisky, An axiomatic approach to sustainable development, Soc Choice Welfare 13 (1996), 231-257.

P. Hammond, Equity, Arrow's conditions and Rawls difference principle, Econometrica 44 (1976), 793-804.

C. Hara, T. Shinotsuka, K. Suzumura, Y. Xu, Continuity and egalitarianism in the evaluation of infinite utility streams, Soc. Choice Welfare 31 (2008), 179- 191.

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

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

M. Mariotti, R. Veneziani, On the impossibility of complete non-interference in Paretian social judgements, Mimeo (2011), Queen Mary, University of London.

M. Mariotti, R. Veneziani, The paradoxes of the liberal ethics of non- interference, Working Paper No. 653 (2009), Queen Mary, University of London.

M. Mariotti, R. Veneziani, ‘Non-interference’ implies equality, Soc Choice Welf 32 (2009), 123-128.

T. Sakai, Intergenerational preferences and sensitivity to the present, Econ Bulletin 4 (26) (2003), 1-5.