权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

NON-WELFARISTIC FOUNDATIONS OF WELFARE ECONOMICS-PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS AND CONSEQUENTIALISM

福利经济学的非福利主义基础——程序公平和结果主义

基本信息

批准号：
09630006
负责人：
SUZUMURA Kotaro
金额：
$ 2.24万
依托单位：
HITOTSUBASHI UNIVERSITY
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
财政年份：
1997
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
1997 至 2000
项目状态：
已结题

项目摘要

Traditional normative economics has been developed on the informational basis which is restrictive in three distinct senses.1. Welfarism : In evaluating the performance of an economic system, traditional normative economics has focussed its attention exclusively on the consequences generated by the economic system in question, and that the evaluation of consequences has been conducted in terms of welfares people enjoy from these consequences, thereby neglecting the non-welfaristic characteristics of consequences and the non-consequential characteristics of opportunities and procedures.2. Ordinalism : In evaluating the consequences of an economic system in terms of welfares people enjoy from these consequences, it is assumed that welfares are ordinal in nature, thereby neglecting cardinal importance of welfares altogether.3. Interpersonal Non-Comparability : Not only are welfares deemed ordinal, but also they are deemed interpersonally non-comparable.There are already several attempts i … More n the literature to go beyond 2. and 3., viz., to ask what kind of theoretical progress we can attain by permitting cardinality of individual welfares and/or interpersonal comparability of individual welfares. This project was an attempt to go beyond 1., viz., to ask what kind of theoretical progress we can attain by going beyond the boundary of welfarist-consequentialism or even beyond consequentialism as such. We have provided some persuasive reasons to go along these unfamiliar avenues. We have also shown that we can still conduct rigorous theoretical analysis even outside the well-cultivated territory of welfarist-consequentialism. In concrete terms, we have established the following results :(a) We have provided a neat axiomatization of the concept of consequentialism and non-consequentialism.(b) We have shown that the Arrovian impossibility theorem on the democratic and rational social choice can be dissipated if we go beyond welfarist-consequentialism.(c) We have shown that the intrinsic value of procedures can be properly taken into consideration and the Rawlsian concept of pure procedural justice can be neatly analysed in theoretical depth.(d) We have suggested that these novel approach open a new passage towards an illuminating analysis of such concrete economic institutions as GATT/WTO regime. Less

传统的规范经济学是在信息基础上发展起来的，它在三个不同的意义上受到限制： 1．福利主义：传统规范经济学在评价一个经济体系的绩效时，只关注该经济体系所产生的后果，并根据人们从这些后果中享有的福利来评价后果，从而忽视了后果的非福利性特征以及机会和程序的非后果性特征。2．序数主义：在根据人们从这些后果中享有的福利来评估经济体系的后果时，假设福利本质上是序数的，从而完全忽略了福利的根本重要性。3。人际不可比性：福利不仅被认为是有序的，而且在人际间也被认为是不可比较的。文献中已经有一些尝试超越 2. 和 3.，即询问通过允许个人福利的基数和/或个人福利的人际可比性，我们可以获得什么样的理论进展。这个项目是一次超越1的尝试，即询问通过超越福利主义后果主义的界限，甚至超越后果主义本身，我们可以获得什么样的理论进步。我们提供了一些有说服力的理由来推动这些不熟悉的途径。我们还表明，即使在福利主义后果主义的精心培育的领域之外，我们仍然可以进行严格的理论分析。具体来说，我们得出了以下结果：（a）我们对结果主义和非结果主义概念提供了简洁的公理化。（b）我们证明，如果我们超越福利主义后果主义，关于民主和理性社会选择的阿罗维不可能定理就可以消散。（c）我们证明，可以适当考虑程序的内在价值，以及罗尔斯的纯粹概念。程序正义可以在理论深度上得到清晰的分析。(d)我们认为，这些新颖的方法为对关贸总协定/世贸组织制度等具体经济制度进行富有启发性的分析开辟了一条新的道路。较少的