Abstract
We present an infinite-horizon extension of the framework of variable-population social choice. Our first main result is the welfarism theorem using the axiom of intratemporal anonymity. By this theorem, the ranking of social alternatives is determined by an intratemporally anonymous and finitely complete quasi-ordering [which we call social welfare relation (SWR)] defined on the set of all streams of utility vectors of generations. We introduce three SWRs: the critical-level generalized utilitarian (CLGU) SWR, the critical-level generalized overtaking (CLGO) SWR, and the critical-level generalized catching-up (CLGC) SWR. They are infinite-horizon extensions of the critical-level generalized utilitarianism. We characterize (in terms of subrelation) the CLGU SWR with five axioms: Strong Pareto, Finite Anonymity, Weak Existence of Critical Levels, Restricted Continuity, and Existence Independence. Further, the CLGO and the CLGC SWRs are characterized by adding consistency axioms. We also present infinite-horizon reformulations of some population ethics axioms. In particular, we characterize the CLGO and the CLGC SWRs associated with a positive critical level by using the axiom of avoidance of the repugnant conclusion.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A variant of the critical-level leximin ordering is proposed by Blackorby et al. (1996).
Boucekkine et al. (2011) apply the CLGU ordering to an endogenous growth model by using time discounting and assuming that a transformation of utility levels is the identity mapping. However, the axiomatic foundation of their evaluation relation is not discussed.
The impossibility of explicit construction of Paretian and anonymous orderings for infinite utility streams was first suggested by Fleurbaey and Michel (2003).
A characterization in terms of subrelation means a characterization of the class of all SWRs that include the SWR considered as a subrelation. The notion of subrelation is explained in Sect. 3.1.
For a discussion of neutrality and its normalization to zero, see Broome (1993).
A quasi-ordering is a reflexive and transitive binary relation.
An ordering extension of a given binary relation is an ordering that includes it as a subrelation.
An axiom similar to IC is presented by Asheim and Tungodden (2002) in the framework of ranking infinite utility streams.
See also Carlson (1998) for other related criticisms.
Blackorby et al. (1997, footnote 35) note that Thomas Hurka also made this point.
References
Arrhenius G (2011) Population Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press (fourthcoming)
Arrhenius G (2000) An impossibility theorem for welfarist axiologies. Econ Philos 16:247–266
Arrow KJ (1963) Social choice and individual values, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York
Asheim GB (1991) Unjust intergenerational allocations. J Econ Theory 54:350–371
Asheim GB (2010) Intergenerational equity. Annu Rev Econ 2:197–222
Asheim GB, Banerjee K (2010) Fixed-step anonymous overtaking and catching-up. Int J Econ Theory 6:149–165
Asheim GB, Buchholz W, Tungodden B (2001) Justifying sustainability. J Environ Econ Manage 41:252–268
Asheim GB, d’Aspremont C, Banerjee K (2010) Generalized time-invariant overtaking. J Math Econ 46:519–533
Asheim GB, Mitra T (2010) Sustainability and discounted utilitarianism in models of economic growth. Math Soc Sci 59:148–169
Asheim GB, Mitra T, Tungodden B (2012) Sustainable recursive social welfare functions. Econ Theory 49:267–292
Asheim GB, Tungodden B (2002) Resolving distributional conflict between generations. University of Oslo, Mimeo
Asheim GB, Tungodden B (2004) Resolving distributional conflict between generations. Econ Theory 24:221–230
Asheim GB, Zuber S (2014) Escaping the repugnant conclusion: rank-discounted utilitarianism with variable population. Theoret Econ 9:629–650
Atsumi H (1965) Neoclassical growth and the efficient program of capital accumulation. Rev Econ Stud 32:127–136
Basu K, Mitra T (2007) Utilitarianism for infinite utility streams: a new welfare criterion and its axiomatic characterization. J Econ Theory 133:350–373
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (1995) Intertemporal population ethics: critical-level utilitarian principles. Econometrica 63:5–10
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (1996) Leximin population ethics. Math Soc Sci 31:115–131
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (1997) Critical-level utilitarianism and the population-ethics dilemma. Econ Philos 13:197–230
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (1998a) Uncertainty and critical-level population principles. J Popul Econ 11:1–20
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (1999) Information invariance in variable population social-choice problems. Int Econ Rev 40:403–422
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (2002) Utilitarianism and the theory of justice. In: Arrow KJ, Sen AK, Suzumura K (eds) Handbook of social choice and welfare, vol I. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 543–596
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (2005) Population issues in social choice theory, welfare economics, and ethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D, Fleurbaey M (1998b) Critical levels and the (reverse) repugnant conclusion. J Econ 67:1–15
Blackorby C, Donaldson D (1984) Social criteria for evaluating population change. J Pub Econ 25:13–33
Boucekkine R, Fabbri G (2013) Assessing Parfit’s repugnant conclusion within a canonical endogenous growth set-up. J Popul Econ 26:751–767
Boucekkine R, Fabbri G, Gozzi F (2011) Revisiting the optimal population size problem under endogenous growth: minimal utility level and finite life. Asia-Pac J Account Econ 18:287–305
Boucekkine R, Fabbri G, Gozzi F (2014) Egalitarianism under population change: age structure does matter. J Math Econ 55:86–100
Broome J (1992) The value of living. Rech Econ Louvain 58:125–142
Broome J (1993) Goodness is reducible to betterness: the evil of death is the value of life. In: Koslowski P, Shionoya Y (eds) The good and the economical: ethical choices in economics and management. Springer, Berline, pp 69–83
Carlson E (1998) Mere addition and two trilemmas of population ethics. Econ Philos 14:283–306
d’Aspremont C (1985) Axioms for social welfare orderings. In: Harwicz L, Schmeidler D, Sonnenschein H (eds) Social goals and social organization: essays in memory of Elisha Pazner. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 19–76
d’Aspremont C (2007) Formal welfarism and intergenerational equity. In: Roemer J, Suzumura K (eds) Intergenerational equity and sustainability. Palgrave, London, pp 113–130
d’Aspremont C, Gevers L (1977) Equity and the informational basis of collective choice. Rev Econ Stud 44:199–209
Diamond P (1965) The evaluation of infinite utility streams. Econometrica 33:170–177
Dubey RS (2011) Fleurbaey-Michel conjecture on equitable weak Paretian social welfare order. J Math Econ 47:434–439
Fleurbaey M, Michel P (2003) Intertemporal equity and the extension of the Ramsey criterion. J Math Econ 39:777–802
Kamaga K (2016) Infinite-horizon social evaluation with variable population size. Sophia University, Mimeo
Kamaga K, Kojima T (2010) On the leximin and utilitarian overtaking criteria with extended anonymity. Soc Choice Welf 35:377–392
Koopmans TC (1960) Stationary ordinal utility and impatience. Econometrica 28:287–309
Lauwers L (2010) Ordering infinite utility streams comes at the cost of a non-Ramsey set. J Math Econ 46:32–37
Lauwers L (2014) The axiomatic approach to the ranking of infinite streams. Discussion Paper Series, 14.07, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Palivos T, Yip CK (1993) Optimal population size and endogenous growth. Econ Lett 41:107–110
Parfit D (1976) On doing the best for our children. In: Bayles M (ed) Ethics and population. Shenkman, Cambridge, pp 100–102
Parfit D (1982) Future generations, further problems. Philos Public Aff 11:113–172
Parfit D (1984) Reasons and persons. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Razin A, Yuen CW (1995) Utilitarian tradeoff between population growth and income growth. J Popul Econ 8:81–87
Sen AK (1970) Collective choice and social welfare. Holden-Day, Amsterdam
Suppes P (1966) Some formal models of grading principles. Synthese 6:284–306
Svensson LG (1980) Equity among generations. Econometrica 48:1251–1256
Szpilrajn E (1930) Sur l’extension de l’ordre partiel. Fundam Math 16:386–389
von Weizsäcker CC (1965) Existence of optimal programs of accumulation for an infinite time horizon. Rev Econ Stud 32:85–104
Zame W (2007) Can intergenerational equity be operationalized? Theoret Econ 2:187–202
Zuber S, Asheim GB (2012) Justifying social discounting: the rank-discounted utilitarian approach. J Econ Theory 147:1572–1601
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to two anonymous referees and an editor of this journal. Their detailed comments and suggestions have greatly improved the current version of this paper. I also thank the participants at the 11th Meeting of the Society for Social Choice and Welfare for their comments. All remaining errors are my own. This study is partly supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) (No. 23730196) from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture, Japan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kamaga, K. Infinite-horizon social evaluation with variable population size. Soc Choice Welf 47, 207–232 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-016-0953-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-016-0953-4