IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Una discusión en torno al concepto de bienestar


  • Luis Fernando Gamboa


  • Darwin Cortés



En este documento se quiere demostrar que una teoría que pretenda fundamentar la política social que no permita las comparaciones interpersonales es inadecuada. Por esta razón, el punto de partida es una crítica a la economía normativa neoclásica. Esta crítica consiste, en últimas, en una crítica al concepto de bienestar de los utilitaristas. Se plantea que el bienestar entendido como utilidad excluye información relevante para juzgar el bienestar de las personas, y se propone que el concepto de bienestar del profesor Amartya Sen es adecuado como base de una teoría para la política social. ***************************************************************** This document seeks to demonstrate the inadequacy of a foundational theory for social policy that will not allow imterpersonal comparisons. Hereby, the starting point is a crtique of neo-classical economics. Ultimately, this consists of a critique on the concept of wellbeing developed by utilitarists. We argue that well-being understood as utility, excludes relevant information to judge the well-being of a person. We propose that the concept of well-being espoused by Professor Amartya Sen is adequate as a basis for a theory of social policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Luis Fernando Gamboa & Darwin Cortés, 1999. "Una discusión en torno al concepto de bienestar," Borradores de Investigación 003708, Universidad del Rosario.
  • Handle: RePEc:col:000091:003708

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


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

    Cited by:

    1. Andrés Fernando Casas & Darwin F. Cortés & Luis Fernando Gamboa, 2003. "Las comparaciones interpersonales y la evaluación de estados sociales alternativos," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 5(8), pages 147-160, January-J.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:col:000091:003708. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Facultad de Economía). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.