Social Choice and Welfare

, Volume 1, Issue 4, pp 263–272

On the relationship between the Hicksian measures of change in welfare and the Pareto principle

  • U. Ebert


The change of welfare for one individual can be measured by the compensating variation (CV) or equivalent variation; the change for a whole society can be evaluated by summing up the individual gains and losses (e.g. Σ CV). Generally there is no equivalence between the positive sign of this sum and a potential improvement for all individuals by redistribution of incomes. In this paper the Σ CV-measure is corrected in a manner such that the new measure is equivalent to the Pareto principle. This correction is defined in a general equilibrium framework and takes into account the attainability of allocations. Finally characterizations of compensation tests are derived.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Boadway RW (1974) The welfare foundations of cost-benefit analysis. Econ J 84:962–939Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boadway RW (1976) The welfare foundations of cost-benefit analysis — a reply. Econ J 86:359–361Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bruce N, Harris RG (1982) Cost-benefit criteria and the compensation principle in evaluating small projects. J Polit Econ 90:755–776Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Debreu G (1951) The coefficient of resource utilization. Econometrica 19:273–292Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Foster E (1976) The welfare foundations of cost-benefit analysis — a comment. Econ J 86:353–358Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mishan EJ (1972) Cost-benefit analysis. George Allen and Unwin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mishan EJ (1976) The use of compensating and equivalent variations in cost-benefit analysis. Economica 43:185–197Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ng YK (1977) Towards a theory of third-best. Public Finance 23:1–15Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ng YK (1979) Welfare economics. MacMillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smith B, Stephen FA (1975) Cost-benefit analysis and compensation criteria: a note. Econ J 85:902–905Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • U. Ebert
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of BonnBonn 1Germany

Personalised recommendations