Skip to main content
Log in

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

  • Published:
Social Choice and Welfare Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Boadway RW (1974) The welfare foundations of cost-benefit analysis. Econ J 84:962–939

    Google Scholar 

  2. Boadway RW (1976) The welfare foundations of cost-benefit analysis — a reply. Econ J 86:359–361

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bruce N, Harris RG (1982) Cost-benefit criteria and the compensation principle in evaluating small projects. J Polit Econ 90:755–776

    Google Scholar 

  4. Debreu G (1951) The coefficient of resource utilization. Econometrica 19:273–292

    Google Scholar 

  5. Foster E (1976) The welfare foundations of cost-benefit analysis — a comment. Econ J 86:353–358

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mishan EJ (1972) Cost-benefit analysis. George Allen and Unwin, London

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mishan EJ (1976) The use of compensating and equivalent variations in cost-benefit analysis. Economica 43:185–197

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ng YK (1977) Towards a theory of third-best. Public Finance 23:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ng YK (1979) Welfare economics. MacMillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  10. Smith B, Stephen FA (1975) Cost-benefit analysis and compensation criteria: a note. Econ J 85:902–905

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

The author thanks D. Elixmann and U. Schweizer for helpful comments. The suggestions of an editor of this journal and of two anonymous references are gratefully acknowledged

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ebert, U. On the relationship between the Hicksian measures of change in welfare and the Pareto principle. Soc Choice Welfare 1, 263–272 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00649261

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00649261

Keywords

Navigation