IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hid/journl/v22y201414p69-84.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ante-litteram anti-welfarism: the case of Marshall and Pareto

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Dardi

    (Università di Firenze - Dipartimento di Scienze per l’Economia e l’Impresa)

Abstract

According to Amartya Sen, welfarism was the leading feature of Welfare Economics (WE) in both its ‘Old’ and ‘New’ version until Arrow’s impossibility theorem demonstrated the necessity of doing away with it if welfare theory is to serve as a guide in evaluating alternative policies. This neat story line can be questioned, however, if we consider the contributions of two pre-Arrovian masters like Pareto and Marshall. The paper argues that, although conventionally assigned to the opposite sides of the Old/New WE divide, they shared a similar critical attitude towards welfarism and an analogous awareness of the necessity of using non-utility information to deal with issues of social choice. If they refrained from drawing all the consequences of their critical stances, this can be attributed to philosophical preconceptions rather than theoretical limitations.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Dardi, 2014. "Ante-litteram anti-welfarism: the case of Marshall and Pareto," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 22(1), pages 69-84.
    • Handle: RePEc:hid:journl:v:22:y:2014:1:4:p:69-84
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.libraweb.net/articoli.php?chiave=201406101&rivista=61
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    ---><---

    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. Laurie Bréban & Muriel Gilardone, 2019. "A missing touch of Adam Smith in Amartya Sen’s account of Public Reasoning: the Man Within for the Man Without," Economics Working Paper from Condorcet Center for political Economy at CREM-CNRS 2019-01-ccr, Condorcet Center for political Economy.

    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:hid:journl:v:22:y:2014:1:4:p:69-84. 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: Mario Aldo Cedrini (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.libraweb.net .

    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.