Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Fundamental utilitarianism and intergenerational equity with extinction discounting.Graciela Chichilnisky, Peter J. Hammond & Nicholas Stern - forthcoming - Social Choice and Welfare.
    Ramsey famously condemned discounting “future enjoyments” as “ethically indefensible”. Suppes enunciated an equity criterion which, when social choice is utilitarian, implies giving equal weight to all individuals’ utilities. By contrast, Arrow accepted, perhaps reluctantly, what he called Koopmans’ :287–309, 1960) “strong argument” implying that no equitable preference ordering exists for a sufficiently unrestricted domain of infinite utility streams. Here we derive an equitable utilitarian objective for a finite population based on a version of the Vickrey–Harsanyi original position, where there is (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Should we discount the welfare of future generations? : Ramsey and Suppes versus Koopmans and Arrow.Graciela Chichilnisky, Peter J. Hammond & Nicholas Stern - unknown
    Ramsey famously pronounced that discounting “future enjoyments” would be ethically indefensible. Suppes enunciated an equity criterion implying that all individuals’ welfare should be treated equally. By contrast, Arrow accepted, perhaps rather reluctantly, the logical force of Koopmans’ argument that no satisfactory preference ordering on a sufficiently unrestricted domain of infinite utility streams satisfies equal treatment. In this paper, we first derive an equitable utilitarian objective based on a version of the Vickrey–Harsanyi original position, extended to allow a variable and uncertain (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations