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

Non-welfare economics and the well-being of phantom agents: an appeal to caution

Author

Listed:
  • Bart Capéau
  • Erwin Ooghe

Abstract

Besley (1988) is one of the few exceptional articles containing non-welfarist optimal tax devices. Feehan(1990) reports an error in his first-best rules. The present note criticizes the fundamentals of Besley's second-best rules. These rules optimize the welfare or well-being of phantom agents rather than the corrected welfare of real existing agents in society.

Suggested Citation

  • Bart Capéau & Erwin Ooghe, 2001. "Non-welfare economics and the well-being of phantom agents: an appeal to caution," Public Economics Working Paper Series wpphnag, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Working Group Public Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpe:papers:wpphnag
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.kuleuven.ac.be/ew/academic/econover/Papers/wpphnag.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. FLEURBAEY, Marc & MANIQUET, François, 1998. "Optimal income taxation: and ordinal approach," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1998065, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    2. Feehan, James P., 1990. "A simple model for merit good arguments : A comment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 127-129, 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. Denis Maguain, 2002. "Les théories de la justice distributive post-rawlsiennes. Une revue de la littérature," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 53(2), pages 165-199.
    2. Creedy, John & Gemmell, Norman & Hérault, Nicolas & Mok, Penny, 2018. "Microsimulation Analysis of Optimal Income Tax Reforms. An Application to New Zealand," Working Paper Series 20834, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    3. Cremer Helmuth & Lozachmeur Jean-Marie & Pestieau Pierre, 2007. "Disability Testing and Retirement," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-34, February.
    4. Ver Eecke, W., 2003. "Adam Smith and Musgrave's concept of merit good," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 701-720.
    5. Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2002. "Cultural heritage as multi-dimensional, multi-value and multi-attribute economic good: toward a new framework for economic analysis and valuation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 529-558.
    6. Maria Racionero, 2000. "Optimal Redistribution with Unobservable Preferences for an Observable Merit Good," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 7(4), pages 479-501, August.
    7. Creedy, John & Gemmell, Norman & Hérault, Nicolas & Mok, Penny, 2018. "Microsimulation Analysis of Optimal Income Tax Reforms. An Application to New Zealand," GLO Discussion Paper Series 213, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    8. Schroyen, Fred, 2005. "An alternative way to model merit good arguments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(5-6), pages 957-966, June.
    9. François Maniquet, 2004. "On the equivalence between welfarism and equality of opportunity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 23(1), pages 127-147, August.
    10. Yukihiro Nishimura, 2008. "Envy Minimization In The Optimal Tax Context," Working Paper 1178, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    11. George Ladd, 1993. "InterpretingEconomic Justice for all as a pre-economic essay on merit wants," Forum for Social Economics, Springer;The Association for Social Economics, vol. 23(1), pages 59-75, September.
    12. Robin Boadway & Maurice Marchand & Pierre Pestieau & María Del Mar Racionero, 2002. "Optimal Redistribution with Heterogeneous Preferences for Leisure," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 4(4), pages 475-498, October.
    13. John Creedy & Nicolas Hérault†, 2011. "Decomposing Inequality and Social Welfare Changes : The Use of Alternative Welfare Metrics," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1121, The University of Melbourne.
    14. Francesca Medda, 2011. "Transport Accessibility as Merit Good," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1124, European Regional Science Association.
    15. Fred Schroyen, 2003. "An alternative way to model merit good arguments," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 595.03, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    16. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:8:y:2003:i:8:p:1-5 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Ravi Kanbur & Jukka Pirttilä & Matti Tuomala, 2006. "Non‐Welfarist Optimal Taxation And Behavioural Public Economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(5), pages 849-868, December.
    18. John Creedy & Norman Gemmell & Nicolas Hérault & Penny Mok, 2020. "A microsimulation analysis of marginal welfare-improving income tax reforms for New Zealand," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 27(2), pages 409-434, April.
    19. Bart Capéau & Erwin Ooghe, 2003. "Merit goods and phantom agents," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 8(8), pages 1-5.
    20. Clément, Valérie & Moureau, Nathalie & Vidal, Marion, 2009. "À la recherche des biens sous tutelle," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 85(4), pages 383-401, décembre.
    21. John Creedy & Nicolas Hérault†, 2011. "Decomposing Inequality and Social Welfare Changes : The Use of Alternative Welfare Metrics," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1121, The University of Melbourne.

    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:wpe:papers:wpphnag. 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: Kristof Bosmans (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cekulbe.html .

    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.