数字错觉:卡尔多-希克斯原理的最终消亡

D. Ellerman
{"title":"数字错觉:卡尔多-希克斯原理的最终消亡","authors":"D. Ellerman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1340637","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Kaldor-Hicks principle (potential Pareto improvement) has fostered the modern revival of an older Marshall-Pigou tradition of welfare economics. That tradition was based on the parsing of a potential change into a change in the size of some \"social pie\" measured in money (e.g., Pigou's \"national dividend\") and a change in the distribution of the pie. By characterizing an increase in the size of the pie (i.e., a Kaldor-Hicks improvement) as an \"increase in efficiency,\" this modernized Marshall-Pigou-Kaldor-Hicks (MPKH) tradition seeks to transcend the strictures of the Paretian treatment of efficiency (which would require actual compensation of the losers so that the whole change was a Pareto improvement). Economists can then with clear professional conscience make the policy recommendation for the increase in efficiency and put to one side the question of compensating the losers as a separate question of equity. However, this whole efficiency-equity analysis turns out to be vulnerable to a simple redescription of exactly the same total changes with a different numeraire or even a reversed numeraire (when only two goods are involved). Then the parsing into \"efficiency\" and \"equity\" parts will change and can even reverse itself so what was previously seen as the potential \"compensation\" is then recommended as the wealth-increasing change. Hence the \"wealth maximization\" principle breaks down in incoherence. The flaw is the numeraire illusion of evaluating changes in both non-numeraire goods and in the numeraire goods, and then misleadingly concluding that transfers in the numeraire goods have no effect on the size of the \"social pie.\" Changes in a yardstick will never be revealed by the same yardstick - but are revealed by switching to a different yardstick (or numeraire). This result undercuts the major applications of the MPKH reasoning in the standard Chicago school (wealth maximization) of law and economics, cost-benefit analysis, policy analysis, and related parts of applied welfare economics.","PeriodicalId":219371,"journal":{"name":"SEIN Environmental Impacts of Business eJournal","volume":"201 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Numeraire Illusion: The Final Demise of the Kaldor-Hicks Principle\",\"authors\":\"D. Ellerman\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1340637\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Kaldor-Hicks principle (potential Pareto improvement) has fostered the modern revival of an older Marshall-Pigou tradition of welfare economics. That tradition was based on the parsing of a potential change into a change in the size of some \\\"social pie\\\" measured in money (e.g., Pigou's \\\"national dividend\\\") and a change in the distribution of the pie. By characterizing an increase in the size of the pie (i.e., a Kaldor-Hicks improvement) as an \\\"increase in efficiency,\\\" this modernized Marshall-Pigou-Kaldor-Hicks (MPKH) tradition seeks to transcend the strictures of the Paretian treatment of efficiency (which would require actual compensation of the losers so that the whole change was a Pareto improvement). Economists can then with clear professional conscience make the policy recommendation for the increase in efficiency and put to one side the question of compensating the losers as a separate question of equity. However, this whole efficiency-equity analysis turns out to be vulnerable to a simple redescription of exactly the same total changes with a different numeraire or even a reversed numeraire (when only two goods are involved). Then the parsing into \\\"efficiency\\\" and \\\"equity\\\" parts will change and can even reverse itself so what was previously seen as the potential \\\"compensation\\\" is then recommended as the wealth-increasing change. Hence the \\\"wealth maximization\\\" principle breaks down in incoherence. The flaw is the numeraire illusion of evaluating changes in both non-numeraire goods and in the numeraire goods, and then misleadingly concluding that transfers in the numeraire goods have no effect on the size of the \\\"social pie.\\\" Changes in a yardstick will never be revealed by the same yardstick - but are revealed by switching to a different yardstick (or numeraire). This result undercuts the major applications of the MPKH reasoning in the standard Chicago school (wealth maximization) of law and economics, cost-benefit analysis, policy analysis, and related parts of applied welfare economics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":219371,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SEIN Environmental Impacts of Business eJournal\",\"volume\":\"201 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SEIN Environmental Impacts of Business eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1340637\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SEIN Environmental Impacts of Business eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1340637","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

卡尔多-希克斯原则(潜在的帕累托改进)促进了马歇尔-庇古福利经济学传统的现代复兴。这一传统的基础是,将潜在的变化解析为以货币衡量的“社会蛋糕”(例如庇古的“国民红利”)大小的变化和蛋糕分配的变化。通过将饼大小的增加(即卡尔多-希克斯改进)描述为“效率的提高”,这一现代化的马歇尔-庇古-卡尔多-希克斯(MPKH)传统试图超越帕累托对效率的限制(这将需要对输家进行实际补偿,以便整个变化是帕累托改进)。然后,经济学家就可以带着清晰的职业良心提出提高效率的政策建议,把补偿输家的问题放在一边,作为一个单独的公平问题。然而,整个效率-公平分析结果很容易受到用不同的数字甚至相反的数字(当只涉及两种商品时)对完全相同的总变化的简单重新描述的影响。然后,对“效率”和“公平”部分的分析将发生变化,甚至可能自我逆转,因此,之前被视为潜在“补偿”的东西,随后被推荐为增加财富的变化。因此,“财富最大化”原则在不连贯中瓦解了。其缺陷在于一种数字错觉,即对非数字商品和数字商品的变化进行评估,然后错误地得出结论,认为数字商品的转移对“社会蛋糕”的大小没有影响。尺度的变化永远不会被相同的尺度所揭示,而是通过切换到不同的尺度(或数字)来揭示。这一结果削弱了MPKH推理在法律和经济学、成本效益分析、政策分析以及应用福利经济学相关部分的标准芝加哥学派(财富最大化)中的主要应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Numeraire Illusion: The Final Demise of the Kaldor-Hicks Principle
The Kaldor-Hicks principle (potential Pareto improvement) has fostered the modern revival of an older Marshall-Pigou tradition of welfare economics. That tradition was based on the parsing of a potential change into a change in the size of some "social pie" measured in money (e.g., Pigou's "national dividend") and a change in the distribution of the pie. By characterizing an increase in the size of the pie (i.e., a Kaldor-Hicks improvement) as an "increase in efficiency," this modernized Marshall-Pigou-Kaldor-Hicks (MPKH) tradition seeks to transcend the strictures of the Paretian treatment of efficiency (which would require actual compensation of the losers so that the whole change was a Pareto improvement). Economists can then with clear professional conscience make the policy recommendation for the increase in efficiency and put to one side the question of compensating the losers as a separate question of equity. However, this whole efficiency-equity analysis turns out to be vulnerable to a simple redescription of exactly the same total changes with a different numeraire or even a reversed numeraire (when only two goods are involved). Then the parsing into "efficiency" and "equity" parts will change and can even reverse itself so what was previously seen as the potential "compensation" is then recommended as the wealth-increasing change. Hence the "wealth maximization" principle breaks down in incoherence. The flaw is the numeraire illusion of evaluating changes in both non-numeraire goods and in the numeraire goods, and then misleadingly concluding that transfers in the numeraire goods have no effect on the size of the "social pie." Changes in a yardstick will never be revealed by the same yardstick - but are revealed by switching to a different yardstick (or numeraire). This result undercuts the major applications of the MPKH reasoning in the standard Chicago school (wealth maximization) of law and economics, cost-benefit analysis, policy analysis, and related parts of applied welfare economics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信