IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxecpp/v39y1987i2p301-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Information in Social Welfare Judgements

Author

Listed:
  • Kelsey, David

Abstract

This paper criticizes the claim that the Arrow Impossibility Theorem arises from an attempt to make social welfare judgments based on inadequate information. This paper shows how it is possible to modify conventio nal social choice to include those kinds of information the absence o f which is said to be responsible for the Arrow Theorem. However, a v ery similar impossibility theorem can be proved in the new framework. This suggests that there is a need to base welfare judgments on card inal utilities (or some similar kind of information). The author anal yzes the Liberal Paradox in terms of the framework proposed in the pa per. Copyright 1987 by Royal Economic Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelsey, David, 1987. "The Role of Information in Social Welfare Judgements," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 301-317, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:39:y:1987:i:2:p:301-17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-7653%28198706%292%3A39%3A2%3C301%3ATROIIS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-V&origin=bc
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

    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. Charles Blackorby & Walter Bossert & David Donaldson, 2006. "Anonymous Single-profile Welfarism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(2), pages 279-287, October.
    2. Susumu Cato, 2014. "Common preference, non-consequential features, and collective decision making," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 18(4), pages 265-287, December.
    3. Charles Blackorby & Walter Bossert & David Donaldson, 2007. "Intertemporal Social Evaluation," International Economic Association Series, in: John Roemer & Kotaro Suzumura (ed.), Intergenerational Equity and Sustainability, chapter 9, pages 131-154, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. A. Baujard, 2006. "From moral welfarism to technical non-welfarism : A step back to Bentham’s felicific calculus of its members," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200606, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    5. Charles Blackorby & Walter Bossert & David Donaldson, 2005. "Multi_profile welfarism: a generalization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 25(1), pages 227-228, October.
    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. BLACKORBY, Charles & BOSSERT, Walter & DONALDSON, David, 2002. "In Defense of Welfarism," Cahiers de recherche 2002-02, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.

    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:oup:oxecpp:v:39:y:1987:i:2:p:301-17. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oep .

    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.