Choosing the Future: Markets, Ethics, and Rapprochement in Social Discounting

IF 11.5 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Journal of Economic Literature Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1257/jel.20211675
Antony Millner, Geoffrey Heal
{"title":"Choosing the Future: Markets, Ethics, and Rapprochement in Social Discounting","authors":"Antony Millner, Geoffrey Heal","doi":"10.1257/jel.20211675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides a critical review of the literature on choosing social discount rates (SDRs) for public cost-benefit analysis. We discuss two dominant approaches, the first based on market prices and the second based on intertemporal ethics. While both methods have attractive features, neither is immune to criticism. The market-based approach is not entirely persuasive even if markets are perfect, and faces further headwinds once the implications of market imperfections are recognised. By contrast, the ‘ethical’ approach—which relates SDRs to marginal rates of substitution implicit in a single planner’s intertemporal welfare function—does not rely exclusively on markets, but raises difficult questions about what that welfare function should be. There is considerable disagreement on this matter, which translates into enormous variation in the evaluation of long-run payoffs. We discuss the origins of these disagreements, and suggest that they are difficult to resolve unequivocally. This leads us to propose a third approach that recognises the immutable nature of some normative disagreements, and proposes methods for aggregating diverse theories of intertemporal social welfare. We illustrate the application of these methods to social discounting, and suggest that they may help us to move beyond long-standing debates that have bedevilled this field. (JEL D60, D61, D71, H43, H54)","PeriodicalId":48416,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Literature","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":11.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20211675","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper provides a critical review of the literature on choosing social discount rates (SDRs) for public cost-benefit analysis. We discuss two dominant approaches, the first based on market prices and the second based on intertemporal ethics. While both methods have attractive features, neither is immune to criticism. The market-based approach is not entirely persuasive even if markets are perfect, and faces further headwinds once the implications of market imperfections are recognised. By contrast, the ‘ethical’ approach—which relates SDRs to marginal rates of substitution implicit in a single planner’s intertemporal welfare function—does not rely exclusively on markets, but raises difficult questions about what that welfare function should be. There is considerable disagreement on this matter, which translates into enormous variation in the evaluation of long-run payoffs. We discuss the origins of these disagreements, and suggest that they are difficult to resolve unequivocally. This leads us to propose a third approach that recognises the immutable nature of some normative disagreements, and proposes methods for aggregating diverse theories of intertemporal social welfare. We illustrate the application of these methods to social discounting, and suggest that they may help us to move beyond long-standing debates that have bedevilled this field. (JEL D60, D61, D71, H43, H54)
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
选择未来:社会贴现中的市场、伦理与和解
本文对用于公共成本效益分析的社会贴现率选择的相关文献进行了综述。我们讨论了两种主要的方法,第一种基于市场价格,第二种基于跨期伦理。虽然这两种方法都有吸引人的特点,但都难免受到批评。即使市场是完美的,基于市场的方法也不完全具有说服力,一旦认识到市场不完善的影响,这种方法还将面临进一步的阻力。相比之下,“道德”方法——将特别提款权与单个计划者跨期福利函数中隐含的边际替代率联系起来——并不完全依赖于市场,但提出了关于福利函数应该是什么的难题。在这个问题上存在相当大的分歧,这导致对长期收益的评估存在巨大差异。我们讨论了这些分歧的根源,并认为它们很难明确地解决。这导致我们提出了第三种方法,该方法认识到一些规范性分歧的不可变性,并提出了整合跨期社会福利各种理论的方法。我们举例说明了这些方法在社会贴现中的应用,并建议它们可以帮助我们超越困扰这一领域的长期争论。(凝胶d60, d61, d71, h43, h54)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.80
自引率
0.80%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: Commencing in 1969, the Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) serves as a vital resource for economists, offering a means to stay informed about the extensive literature in the field. Each JEL issue features commissioned, peer-reviewed survey and review articles, book reviews, an annotated bibliography categorizing new books by subject, and an annual index of dissertations from North American universities.
期刊最新文献
The Global Infrastructure Gap: Potential, Perils, and a Framework for Distinction The Economics of Religion The Ends of Freedom: Reclaiming America's Lost Promise of Economic Rights A Fed for Our Times: A Review Essay on 21st Century Monetary Policy by Ben Bernanke The Myth That Made Us: How False Beliefs about Racism and Meritocracy Broke Our Economy (and How to Fix It)
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1