IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joecth/v10y1997i2p241-256.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social welfare orderings for ratio-scale measurable utilities

Author

Listed:
  • John A. Weymark

    (Department of Economics, 997-1873 East Mall, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., CANADA V6T 1Z1)

  • Kai-yuen Tsui

    (Department of Economics, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., HONG KONG)

Abstract

This article characterizes all of the continuous social welfare orderings which satisfy the Weak (resp. Strong) Pareto principle when utilities are ratio-scale measurable. With Weak Pareto, on both the nonnegative and positive orthants the social welfare ordering must be representable by a weakly increasing Cobb-Douglas social welfare function while on the whole Euclidean space the social welfare ordering must be strongly dictatorial. With Strong Pareto, on the positive orthant the social welfare ordering must be representable by a strictly increasing Cobb-Douglas social welfare function but on the other two domains an impossibility theorem is obtained.

Suggested Citation

  • John A. Weymark & Kai-yuen Tsui, 1997. "Social welfare orderings for ratio-scale measurable utilities," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 10(2), pages 241-256.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:10:y:1997:i:2:p:241-256
    Note: Received: July 31, 1995; revised version August 7, 1996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00199/papers/7010002/70100241.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00199/papers/7010002/70100241.ps.gz
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thibault Gajdos & John Weymark, 2005. "Multidimensional generalized Gini indices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(3), pages 471-496, October.
    2. Juan D. Moreno-Ternero & Lars Peter Østerdal, 2017. "A normative foundation for equity-sensitive health evaluation: The role of relative comparisons of health gains," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 19(5), pages 1009-1025, October.
    3. Xu, Yongsheng & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2013. "Rationality and solutions to nonconvex bargaining problems: Rationalizability and Nash solutions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 66-70.
    4. Yongsheng Xu & Naoki Yoshihara, 2020. "Nonconvex Bargaining Problems: Some Recent Developments," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 7-41, November.
    5. Koen Decancq & María Ana Lugo, 2009. "Measuring inequality of well-being with a correlation-sensitive multidimensional Gini index," Working Papers 124, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    6. d'Aspremont, Claude & Gevers, Louis, 2002. "Social welfare functionals and interpersonal comparability," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 459-541, Elsevier.
    7. Peter J. Hammond, 2023. "Roberts’ weak welfarism theorem: a minor correction," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(1), pages 121-134, January.
    8. Hirofumi Yamamura, 2017. "Interpersonal comparison necessary for Arrovian aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(1), pages 37-64, June.
    9. Marco Mariotti & Roberto Veneziani, 2018. "Opportunities as Chances: Maximising the Probability that Everybody Succeeds," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(611), pages 1609-1633, June.
    10. Naumova, Natalia & Yanovskaya, Elena, 2001. "Nash social welfare orderings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 203-231, November.
    11. Horst Zank, 2007. "Social welfare functions with a reference income," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(4), pages 609-636, June.
    12. Stergios Athanassoglou, 2015. "Multidimensional welfare rankings under weight imprecision: a social choice perspective," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(4), pages 719-744, April.
    13. Jacob M. Nebel, 2023. "Strong dictatorship via ratio-scale measurable utilities: a simpler proof," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 11(1), pages 101-106, April.
    14. Walter Bossert & Kohei Kamaga, 2020. "An axiomatization of the mixed utilitarian–maximin social welfare orderings," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(2), pages 451-473, March.
    15. MORENO-TERNERO, Juan & OSTERDAL, Lars P., 2014. "Normative foundations for equity-sensitive population health evaluation functions," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2014031, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    16. Nicolas Ruiz, 2018. "Measuring The Joint Distribution Of Household’S Income, Consumption And Wealth Using Nested Generalized Mean," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 63(03), pages 759-785, June.
    17. Ebert, Udo & Welsch, Heinz, 2004. "Meaningful environmental indices: a social choice approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 270-283, March.
    18. Marley, A. A. J., 2002. "Random utility models and their applications: recent developments," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 289-302, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:10:y:1997:i:2:p:241-256. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.