IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2502.04934.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Impartial utilitarianism on infinite utility streams

Author

Listed:
  • Kensei Nakamura

Abstract

When evaluating policies that affect future generations, the most commonly used criterion is the discounted utilitarian rule. However, in terms of intergenerational fairness, it is difficult to justify prioritizing the current generation over future generations. This paper axiomatically examines impartial utilitarian rules over infinite-dimensional utility streams. We provide simple characterizations of the social welfare ordering evaluating utility streams by their long-run average in the domain where the average can be defined. Furthermore, we derive the necessary and sufficient conditions of the same axioms in a more general domain, the set of bounded streams. Some of these results are closely related to the Banach limits, a well-known generalization of the classical limit concept for streams. Thus, this paper can be seen as proposing an appealing subclass of the Banach limits by the axiomatic analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Kensei Nakamura, 2025. "Impartial utilitarianism on infinite utility streams," Papers 2502.04934, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2502.04934
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2502.04934
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaushik Basu & Tapan Mitra, 2003. "Aggregating Infinite Utility Streams with InterGenerational Equity: The Impossibility of Being Paretian," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(5), pages 1557-1563, September.
    2. Li, Chen & Wakker, Peter P., 2024. "A simple and general axiomatization of average utility maximization for infinite streams," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    3. Khan, Urmee & Stinchcombe, Maxwell B., 2018. "Planning for the long run: Programming with patient, Pareto responsive preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 444-478.
    4. 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.
    5. Kaname Miyagishima, 2015. "A Characterization Of The Rawlsian Social Ordering Over Infinite Utility Streams," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(3), pages 303-308, July.
    6. Graciela Chichilnisky, 1996. "An axiomatic approach to sustainable development," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 13(2), pages 231-257, April.
    7. Eric Maskin, 1978. "A Theorem on Utilitarianism," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 45(1), pages 93-96.
    8. Charalambos D. Aliprantis & Kim C. Border, 2006. "Infinite Dimensional Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-3-540-29587-7, July.
    9. Kuntal Banerjee, 2006. "On the Extension of the Utilitarian and Suppes–Sen Social Welfare Relations to Infinite Utility Streams," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(2), pages 327-339, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pivato, Marcus & Fleurbaey, Marc, 2024. "Intergenerational equity and infinite-population ethics: A survey," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    2. Geir B. Asheim, 2014. "Equitable intergenerational preferences and sustainability," Chapters, in: Giles Atkinson & Simon Dietz & Eric Neumayer & Matthew Agarwala (ed.), Handbook of Sustainable Development, chapter 8, pages 125-139, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Adam Jonsson & Mark Voorneveld, 2015. "Utilitarianism on infinite utility streams: summable differences and finite averages," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(1), pages 19-31, April.
    4. Jonsson, Adam & Voorneveld, Mark, 2014. "Utilitarianism for infinite utility streams: summable differences and finite averages," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 747, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 15 Apr 2014.
    5. Cairns, Robert D. & Del Campo, Stellio & Martinet, Vincent, 2019. "Sustainability of an economy relying on two reproducible assets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 145-160.
    6. Charles Figuières & Mabel Tidball, 2016. "Sustainable Exploitation of a Natural Resource: A Satisfying Use of Chichilnisky’s Criterion," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Graciela Chichilnisky & Armon Rezai (ed.), The Economics of the Global Environment, pages 207-229, Springer.
    7. Jean-Pierre Drugeon & Thai Ha Huy, 2022. "A not so myopic axiomatization of discounting," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 73(1), pages 349-376, February.
    8. Luc Lauwers, 2016. "Intergenerational Equity, Efficiency, and Constructibility," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Graciela Chichilnisky & Armon Rezai (ed.), The Economics of the Global Environment, pages 191-206, Springer.
    9. Frikk Nesje & Paolo G. Piacquadio & Paolo Giovanni Piacquadio, 2025. "Intergenerational Discounting and Inequality," CESifo Working Paper Series 11630, CESifo.
    10. Pivato, Marcus & Vergopoulos, Vassili, 2017. "Subjective expected utility representations for Savage preferences on topological spaces," MPRA Paper 77359, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Fleurbaey, Marc, 2015. "On sustainability and social welfare," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 34-53.
    12. Chichilnisky, Graciela & Hammond, Peter J. & Stern, Nicholas, 2018. "Should We Discount the Welfare of Future Generations? Ramsey and Suppes versus Koopmans and Arrow," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1174, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    13. Ha-Huy, Thai, 2022. "A tale of two Rawlsian criteria," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 30-35.
    14. Geir B. Asheim & Tapan Mitra & Bertil Tungodden, 2016. "Sustainable Recursive Social Welfare Functions," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Graciela Chichilnisky & Armon Rezai (ed.), The Economics of the Global Environment, pages 165-190, Springer.
    15. Ram Sewak Dubey & Tapan Mitra, 2011. "On equitable social welfare functions satisfying the Weak Pareto Axiom: A complete characterization," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 7(3), pages 231-250, September.
    16. Mertens, Jean-François & Rubinchik, Anna, 2012. "Intergenerational Equity And The Discount Rate For Policy Analysis," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 61-93, February.
    17. Zuber, Stéphane & Asheim, Geir B., 2012. "Justifying social discounting: The rank-discounted utilitarian approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(4), pages 1572-1601.
    18. Alvarez-Cuadrado, Francisco & Van Long, Ngo, 2009. "A mixed Bentham-Rawls criterion for intergenerational equity: Theory and implications," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 154-168, September.
    19. Bach Dong-Xuan & Philippe Bich, 2024. "Dynamic choices, temporal invariance and variational discounting," Papers 2408.05632, arXiv.org.
    20. Asier Estevan & Roberto Maura & Oscar Valero, 2024. "Intergenerational Preferences and Continuity: Reconciling Order and Topology," Papers 2402.01699, arXiv.org.

    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:arx:papers:2502.04934. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.