Fairness versus welfare: Notes on the Pareto principle, preferences, and distributive justice

Journal of Legal Studies

Volumn 32, Issue 1 I, 2003, Pages 331-362

  Kaplow, Louis ^a   Shavell, Steven ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0042671102     PISSN: 00472530     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/345679     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. Chang, Howard F. 2000a. A Liberal Theory of Social Welfare: Fairness, Utility, and the Pareto Principle. Yale Law Journal 110: 173-235.
2. _. 2000b. The Possibility of a Fair Paretian. Yale Law Journal 110: 251-58.
3. Craswell, Richard. 2003. Kaplow and Shavell on the Substance of Fairness. Journal of Legal Studies 32:245-75.
4. Kaplow, Louis, and Steven Shavell. 1994. Why the Legal System Is Less Efficient Than the Income Tax in Redistributing Income, Journal of Legal Studies 23: 667-81.
5. _. 1999. The Conflict between Notions of Fairness and the Pareto Principle. American Law and Economics Review 1: 63-77.
6. _. 2000. Notions of Fairness versus the Pareto Principle: On the Role of Logical Consistency. Yale Law Journal 110:237-49.
7. _. 2001. Any Non-welfarist Method of Policy Assessment Violates the Pareto Principle. Journal of Political Economy 109: 281-86.
8. _. 2002. Fairness versus Welfare. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press (FVW). (Version previously published in Harvard Law Review 114 (2001): 961-1388.)
9. Kernhauser, Lewis A. 2003. Preferences, Well-Being, and Morality in Social Decisions. Journal of Legal Studies 32:303-29.
10. Rawls, John. 1980. Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory. Journal of Philosophy 77:515-72.
11. Ross, W. D. 1930. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
12. Waldron, Jeremy. 2003. Locating Distribution. Journal of Legal Studies 32: 277-302.