The Calculus of Consent after Thirty Years
AbstractIt is shown that the basic normative argument of the 'calculus' is moored to a collectivistic unanimity norm. As most scholars working in the field of public choice, including the authors of the seminal 'calculus,' would otherwise reject collectivistic normative premises, a reinterpretation of the status of the unanimity principle of the 'calculus' seems unavoidable. The paper argues that this can be done if the basic formation of a society is not characterized as starting from a given set of individuals but rather in terms of the formation of clubs. This amounts to the same thing as substituting universalistic ethical premises by particularistic ones which are more in line with standard economic methodology. Copyright 1994 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Public Choice.
Volume (Year): 79 (1994)
Issue (Month): 3-4 (June)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100332
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Zane Spindler & Xavier De Vanssay, 2003. "Constitutional Design for a Rent Seeking Society: The Voting Rule Choice Revisited," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 95-105, June.
- Vanberg, Georg, 2011. "Substance vs. procedure: Constitutional enforcement and constitutional choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 309-318.
- Werner Güth & Hartmut Kliemt, 2011. "Procedurally Fair Provision of Public Projects An axiomatic characterization," Jena Economic Research Papers 2011-016, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- Werner Gueth & Hartmut Kliemt, 2013.
"Fairness That Money Can Buy. Procedural Egalitarianism in Practice,"
Rationality, Markets and Morals,
Frankfurt School Verlag, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, vol. 4(65), May.
- Werner Güth & Hartmut Kliemt, 2013. "Fairness That Money Can Buy - Procedural Egalitarianism in Practice," Jena Economic Research Papers 2013-003, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.