IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v32y2022i3p475-501_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Against Paretianism: A Wealth Creation Approach to Business Ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Young, Carson

Abstract

How should we distinguish between ethical and unethical ways of pursuing profit in a market? The market failures approach (MFA) to business ethics purports to provide an answer to this question. I argue that it fails to do so. The source of this failure is the MFA’s reliance on Pareto efficiency as a core ethical principle. Many ethically “preferred” tactics for seeking profit cannot be justified by appeal to Pareto efficiency. One important reason for this is that Pareto efficiency, as understood by the theory of welfare economics upon which the MFA relies, assumes a static conception of efficiency. This is a problem because many ethically “preferred” tactics can only be justified by appeal to dynamic efficiency considerations. I argue that, instead of Pareto efficiency, we should look to the value of wealth creation to understand the ethical constraints on how market actors may pursue profit.

Suggested Citation

  • Young, Carson, 2022. "Against Paretianism: A Wealth Creation Approach to Business Ethics," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 475-501, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:32:y:2022:i:3:p:475-501_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X21000312/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matthew Caulfield, 2023. "Between Markets, Politics, and Ethics: On Vendor Conscience and Impersonal Markets," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(2), pages 307-326, November.

    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:cup:buetqu:v:32:y:2022:i:3:p:475-501_6. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    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.