 The Case for Ends Paternalism: Extending Le Grand and New’s Framework for Justification of Government PaternalismDan Acland Review of Behavioral Economics, 2018, vol. 5, issue 1, 1-22 Abstract: Le Grand and New, in their recent book, “Government Paternalism: Nanny State or Helpful Friend,†present a novel definition of paternalism and a framework for thinking about whether any given paternalistic policy can be considered justifiable. I show that their framework is flawed in that it restricts justifiable paternalism to that which is intended to alter individuals’ judgment about the means they use to pursue their self-determined ends. I show that the principles they use to justify certain kinds of means paternalism also justify certain kinds of ends paternalism. In particular, when there is a body of rigorous social-science evidence that individuals select ends that they themselves, if they had adequate information or experience would prefer not to pursue, and when other conditions are met, ends paternalism may be considered to improve the wellbeing of the individual as determined by the individual themselves. I present examples of policies that could be justified under this framework, and offer cautionary notes. Keywords: Easterlin Paradox; comparative political economy; economic growth; income; happiness; life satisfaction; subjective well-being; transition countries; less developed countries; developed countries; long-term; short-term; trends; fluctuations; --> (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:now:jnlrbe:105.00000074 Access Statistics for this article More articles in Review of Behavioral Economics from now publishers |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.