Preference, Well-Being, and Morality in Social Decisions

Lewis A. Kornhauser

The Journal of Legal Studies, 2003, vol. 32, issue 1, 303-329

Abstract: Fairness versus Welfare evaluates the strategy of incorporation that Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell use to defend the exclusive use of welfarist criteria in the evaluation of legal rules and institutions. The strategy of incorporation includes every concern that motivates the agent with the agent’s preference ordering. More specifically, this extended preference ordering encompasses her concerns arising from deontological constraints and consideration of justice. The essay argues that a strategy of incorporation presents two difficulties for an analyst committed to welfarist evaluation. First, incorporating concerns about rights does not resolve the tension between ex ante and ex post evaluation of institutions. Second, extended preferences should not be aggregated as welfarism directs. The strategy of incorporation ignores the distinction between “preference” (narrowly understood) and “judgment.”

Date: 2003
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/345569 (text/html)
Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:32:y:2003:p:303-329

DOI: 10.1086/345569

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in The Journal of Legal Studies from University of Chicago Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Journals Division ().