The concept of social welfare in welfare economics: a complex relation between ethics, politics and economics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29393/CF39-2CBFN10002Keywords:
philosophy of economics, welfare economics, social welfare, ethics, utilityAbstract
The aim of this writing is to contribute to the analysis of the specific aspects in which the relationships between ethics and economics occur. In particular, to show that economics, considered in its neoclassical synthesis, can hardly sustain the distinction between normative economics and positive economics. Since any notion of efficiency linked to social welfare implies sustaining normative propositions in a non-trivial sense. Not only that, the most well-known results of welfare economics, such as Arrow’s impossibility theorem, are only valid if a very restricted informational structure of utility functions is considered. In this sense, it is necessary to use a less restrictive framework to think and model differents criteria of social welfare. Considering this, it is shown that the interaction between economics and ethics must be strengthened, since interdisciplinary work allows evaluating public policies from perspectives that are not always visible to the economists’ own tools.
Downloads
References
Arrow, K. J. (2012). Social choice and individual values (3rd ed.). Yale University Press.
Backhouse, R. E. (2006). Explorations in economic methodology: From Lakatos to empirical philosophy of science. Routledge.
Blaug, M. (1985). La metodología de la economía o cómo explican los economistas [The methodology of economics or how economists explain]. Alianza Editorial.
Binmore, K. (2005). Natural justice. Oxford University Press.
Broome, J. (2004). Ethics out of economics. Cambridge University Press.
Cochran, C., & O’Connor, C. (2019). Inequality and inequity in the emergence of conventions. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 18(3), 264–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X19828371
Fleurbaey, M., & Maniquet, F. (2011). A theory of fairness and social welfare. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511851988
Gaertner, W. (2009). A primer in social choice theory (Rev. ed.). Oxford University Press.
Greaves, H. (2017). A reconsideration of the Harsanyi–Sen–Weymark debate on utilitarianism. Utilitas, 29(2), 175–213. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0953820816000169
Güth, W., & Kliemt, H. (2010). What ethics can learn from experimental economics—if anything. European Journal of Political Economy, 26(3), 302–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2010.05.005
Hausman, D. M. (1992). The inexact and separate science of economics. Cambridge University Press.
Hausman, D. M., & McPherson, M. S. (2006). Economic analysis, moral philosophy, and public policy (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Hausman, D. M. (2018). The bond between positive and normative economics. Revue d'économie politique, 128(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.3917/redp.282.0191
Hicks, J. R. (1939). The foundations of welfare economics. The Economic Journal, 49(196), 696–712. https://doi.org/10.2307/2225023
Hoover, K. D. (2010). Idealizing reduction: The microfoundations of macroeconomics. Erkenntnis, 73(3), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-010-9235-1
Jehle, G. A., & Reny, P. J. (2011). Advanced microeconomic theory (3rd ed.). Pearson Education.
Lisciandra, C. (2018). The role of psychology in behavioral economics: The case of social preferences. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 72, 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2018.01.010
Lucas, R. E. (2004). The industrial revolution: Past and future. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2004/the-industrial-revolution-past-and-future
Peterson, M. (2017). An introduction to decision theory (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Rawls, J. (1996). Liberalismo político [Political liberalism]. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Reiss, J. (2013). Philosophy of economics: A contemporary introduction. Routledge.
Robbins, L. (2007). An essay on the nature and significance of economic science. Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Roemer, J. E. (1998). Theories of distributive justice. Harvard University Press.
Roemer, J. E. (2008). Harsanyi’s impartial observer is not a utilitarian. In M. Fleurbaey, M. Salles, & J. A. Weymark (Eds.), Justice, political liberalism, and utilitarianism: Themes from Harsanyi and Rawls (pp. 213–234). Cambridge University Press.
Sandel, M. J. (2012). What money can't buy: The moral limits of markets. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Satz, D. (2010). Why some things should not be for sale: The moral limits of markets. Oxford University Press.
Skyrms, B. (2014). Evolution of the social contract. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107279330
Weintraub, E. R. (2002). How economics became a mathematical science. Duke University Press.
Weymark, J. A. (1991). A reconsideration of the Harsanyi-Sen debate on utilitarianism. In J. Elster & J. E. Roemer (Eds.), Interpersonal comparisons of well-being (pp. 255–320). Cambridge University Press.
Yaari, M. E., & Bar-Hillel, M. (1984). On dividing justly. Social Choice and Welfare, 1(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00297056
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2021 Universidad de Concepción
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
