Abstract
Intergenerational justice is a matter that should primarily concern the present generation, since the individuals living now are those to take immediate decisions affecting generations that will be living in the future, and even in the far future, as we know, for example, from the exhaustibility of some resources or from the long-term effects of pollution such as global warming. Of course, each future generation will become ‘present’ at some point in time, and the reasoning followed for the present ‘present generation’ about intergenerational justice could be repeated at that point in time. But, to develop this reasoning, each present generation should have a representation of future generations’ interests. In that respect, a simple formulation of the problem that has been extensively analyzed consists in trying to find, under equity and efficiency conditions, an ordering of the set of possible ‘infinite utility streams’, that is, of the set of possible infinite sequences of utility levels attached to the successive generations starting with the present generation. In such a formulation, the welfare of each generation is represented by a single utility level, as if a generation were composed of a single individual or of a cohort of identical individuals with identical allocation.
I thank the participants to the IEA Roundtable Meeting on Intergenerational Equity, and in particular Geir Asheim and Walter Bossert, for their fruitful comments and suggestions. Financial support from the Belgian Science Policy Office (CLIMNEG 2 and IAP programmes) is gratefully acknowledged.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arrow, K. J. ( 1951, 2d ed.1963), Social Choice and Individual Values ( New York: Wiley).
Asheim, G. B. and Tungodden, B. (2004) ‘Resolving Distributional Conflicts between Generations’, Economic Theory, vol. 24, pp. 221–30.
d’Aspremont, C. (1985) ‘Axioms for Social Welfare Orderings,’ in: Hurwitz, L., Schmeidler, D. and Sonnenschein, H. (eds), Social Goals and Social Organizations: Essays in Memory of Elisha Pazner ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press ), pp. 19–76.
d’Aspremont, C. and Gevers, L. (1977) ‘Equity and the Informational Basis of Collective Choice,’ Review of Economic Studies, vol. 44, pp. 199–209.
d’Aspremont, C. and Gevers, L. (2002) ‘Social Welfare Functionals and Interpersonal Comparability’, in Arrow, K., Sen A. and Suzumura K. (eds), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, vol. I ( Amsterdam: Elsevier ), pp. 459–541.
Atsumi, H. (1965) ‘Neoclassical Growth and the Efficient Program of Capital Accumulation’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 32, pp. 127–36.
Basu, K. and Mitra, T. (2003a) ‘Aggregating Infinite Utility Streams with Intergenerational Equity: the Impossibility of Being Paretian’, Econometrica, vol. 71, pp. 1557–63.
Basu, K. and Mitra, T. (2003b) ‘Utilitarianism for Infinite Utility Streams: a New Welfare Criterion and its Axiomatic Characterisation’, Working Paper no. 03–05, Department of Economics, Cornell University.
Blackorby, C., Bossert W. and Donaldson, D. (2002) ‘Utilitarianism and the Theory of Justice’, in Arrow, K., Sen A. and Suzumura K. (eds), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, vol. I ( Amsterdam: Elsevier ), pp. 543–96.
Bossert, W., Sprumont Y. and Suzumura K. (2004) ‘The Possibility of Ordering Infinite Utility Streams’, Cahier 12–2004, CIREQ.
Chakravarty, S. (1962) ‘The Existence of an Optimum Savings Program’, Econometrica, vol. 30, pp. 178–87.
Debreu, G. (1960) ‘Topological Methods in Cardinal Utility Theory’, in Arrow, K.J., Karlin, S., and Suppes, P. (eds), Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences ( Stanford: Stanford University Press ), pp. 16–26.
Diamond, P. (1965) ‘The Evaluation of Infinite Utility Streams’, Econometrica, vol. 33, pp. 170–7.
Dhillon, A. (1998) ‘Extended Pareto Rules and Relative Utilitarianism’, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15, pp. 521–42.
Fleming, M. (1952) ‘A Cardinal Concept of Welfare’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 66, pp. 366–84.
Fleurbaey, M. and Michel, P. (2003) ‘Intertemporal Equity and the Extension of the Ramsey Criterion’, Journal of Mathematical Economics, vol. 39, pp. 777–802.
Gevers, L. (1979) ‘On Interpersonal Comparability and Social Welfare Orderings’,Econometrica vol. 47, pp. 75–89.
Hammond, P.J. (1976) ‘Equity, Arrow’s Conditions, and Rawls’ Difference Principle’, Econometrica, vol. 44, pp. 793–804.
Hammond, P.J. (1979) ‘Equity in Two Person Situations: Some Consequences’, Econometrica, vol. 47, pp. 1127–35.
Kolm, S.C. (1972) Justice etEquité ( Paris: CNRS).
Koopmans, T. C. (1960) ‘Stationary Ordinal Utility and Impatience’, Econometrica, vol. 28, pp. 287–309.
Lauwers L. (1998) ‘Intertemporal Objective Functions. Strong Pareto versus Anonymity’, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol. 35, pp. 37–55.
Lauwers, L. and Van Liedekerke, L. (1995) ‘Ultraproducts and Aggregation’, Journal of Mathematical Economics, vol. 24, pp. 217–37.
Mongin, P. and d’Aspremont, C. (1998) ‘Utility Theory and Ethics’, in Barberà S., Hammond P. and Seidl C. (eds), Handbook of Utility Theory, vol. 1: Principles (Dordrecht: Kluwer ), pp. 371–481.
Ramsey, F. (1928) ‘A Mathematical Theory of Savings’, Economic Journal, vol. 38, pp. 543–59.
Rawls, J. (1971), A Theory of Justice ( Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Sen, A. K. (1970) Collective Choice and Social Welfare ( San Francisco: Holden-Day).
Sen, A. K. (1976) ‘Welfare Inequalities and Rawlsian Axiomatics’, Theory and Decision,vol. 7, pp. 243–62.
Sen, A. K. (1977) ‘On Weights and Measures: Informational Constraints in Social Welfare Analysis’, Econometrica vol. 45, pp. 1539–72.
Suppes, P. (1966) ‘Some Formal Models of Grading Principles’, Synthèse, vol. 6, pp. 284–306.
Svensson, L.-G. (1980) ‘Equity Among Generations’, Econometrica, vol. 48, pp. 1251–6.
Szpilrajn, E. (1930) ‘Sur l’extension de l’ordre partiel’, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 16, pp. 386–9.
Weymark, J. A. (1981) ‘Generalized Gini Inequality Indices’, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol. 1, pp. 409–30.
von Weizsäcker, C. C. (1965) ‘Existence of Optimal Programmes of Accumulation for an Infinite Time Horizon’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 32, pp. 85–104.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2007 International Economic Association
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
d’Aspremont, C. (2007). Formal Welfarism and Intergenerational Equity. In: Roemer, J., Suzumura, K. (eds) Intergenerational Equity and Sustainability. International Economic Association Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230236769_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230236769_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-28344-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-23676-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)