Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorAsheim, Geir B.
dc.contributor.authorMitra, Tapan
dc.contributor.authorTungodden, Bertil
dc.date.accessioned2012-10-18T12:57:09Z
dc.date.available2012-10-18T12:57:09Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.issn0938-2259
dc.identifier.issn1432-0479
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/162653
dc.description.abstractWhat ethical criterion for intergenerational justice should be adopted, e.g., when faced with the task of managing the global environment? Koopmans’ axiomatization of discounted utilitarianism is based on seemingly compelling conditions, yet this criterion leads to hard-to-justify outcomes. The present analysis considers a class of sustainable recursive social welfare functions within Koopmans’ general framework. This class is axiomatized by means of a weak equity condition (“Hammond Equity for the Future”) and general existence is established. Any member of the class satisfies the key axioms of Chichilnisky’s “sustainable preferences”. The analysis singles out one of Koopmans’ original separability conditions (his Postulate 3′a), here called “Independent Present”, as particularly questionable from an ethical perspective.no_NO
dc.language.isoengno_NO
dc.publisherSpringerno_NO
dc.subjectintergenerational justiceno_NO
dc.subjectsustainabilityno_NO
dc.subjectdiscounted utilitarianismno_NO
dc.titleSustainable recursive social welfare functionsno_NO
dc.typeJournal articleno_NO
dc.typePeer reviewedno_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Social science: 200::Economics: 210::Economics: 212no_NO
dc.source.pagenumber267-292no_NO
dc.source.volume49no_NO
dc.source.journalEconomic Theoryno_NO
dc.source.issue2no_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00199-010-0573-7


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel