IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qed/wpaper/985.html

Personal Goods, Efficiency And The Law

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Usher

    (Department of Economics, Queen's University)

Abstract

Personal goods, such as leisure and life expectancy, have no unique market price which is the same for everybody. When personal goods are arguments in the utility fucntion and when everybody's utility function is the same, the valuation of personal goods is higher for rich people than for poor people. Thus, rigidly applied in cost-benefit analysis or in the design of the law, the efficiency criterion places a higher value upon the life of a rich person than upon the life of a poor person.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Usher, 1999. "Personal Goods, Efficiency And The Law," Working Paper 985, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    • Handle: RePEc:qed:wpaper:985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below 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
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Liqun Liu, 2004. "Comorbidities and the willingness to pay for reducing the risk of a targeted disease: introducing endogenous effort for risk reduction," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 493-498, May.
    2. Olof Johansson-Stenman, 2005. "Distributional Weights in Cost-Benefit Analysis—Should We Forget about Them?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(3).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • K1 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law

    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:qed:wpaper:985. 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: Mark Babcock (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/qedquca.html .

    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.