Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=886571
 
 

Citations (6)



 
 

Footnotes (145)



 


 



Inequality and Uncertainty: Theory and Legal Applications


Matthew D. Adler


Duke University - School of Law

Chris William Sanchirico


University of Pennsylvania Law School; University of Pennsylvania Wharton School - Business Economics and Public Policy Department


University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 155, p. 279, 2006
U of Penn Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 06-02
U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 06-05

Abstract:     
"Welfarism" is the principle that social policy should be based solely on individual well-being with no reference to "fairness" or "rights." The propriety of this approach has recently been the subject of extensive debate within legal scholarship. Rather than contributing (directly) to this debate, we identify and analyze a problem within welfarism that has received far too little attention. Call this the "ex ante/ex post" problem. The problem arises from the combination of uncertainty - an inevitable feature of real policy choice - and a social preference for equality. If the policymaker is not a utilitarian, but rather has a "social welfare function" that is equity-regarding to some degree, then she faces the following choice: Should she care about the equalization of expected well-being (the ex ante approach), or should she care about the expected equalization of actual well-being (the ex post approach)? Should she focus on the equality of prospects or the prospects for equality?

In this Article, we bring the ex ante/ex post problem to the attention of legal academics, provide novel insight into when and why the problem arises, and highlight legal applications where the problem figures prominently. We ultimately conclude that welfarism requires an ex post approach. This is a counterintuitive conclusion because the ex post approach can conflict with ex ante Pareto superiority. Indeed, the Article demonstrates that the ex post application of every equity-regarding social welfare function - whatever its particular form - must conflict with ex ante Pareto superiority in some choice situations. Among other things, then, the Article shows that legal academics must abandon either their commitment to welfarism or their commitment to ex ante Pareto superiority.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 99

Keywords: Social Welfare, Welfarism, Fairness, Utilitarianism, Consequentialism, Inequality, Equity, Uncertainty, Ex Post Social Welfare, Ex Ante Social Welfare, Cost Benefit Analysis, Pigou-Dalton Principle, Sure Thing Principle, Time Inconsistency, Compensation, Insurance

JEL Classification: K1, K2, K3, D3, D63, H23, I3

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 24, 2006 ; Last revised: January 9, 2009

Suggested Citation

Adler, Matthew D. and Sanchirico, Chris William, Inequality and Uncertainty: Theory and Legal Applications. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 155, p. 279, 2006; U of Penn Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 06-02; U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 06-05. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=886571 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.886571

Contact Information

Matthew D. Adler
Duke University - School of Law ( email )
Box 90360
Duke School of Law
Durham, NC 27708
United States
Chris William Sanchirico (Contact Author)
University of Pennsylvania Law School ( email )
3501 Sansom Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States
215-898-4220 (Phone)
HOME PAGE: http://www.law.upenn.edu/faculty/csanchir/
University of Pennsylvania Wharton School - Business Economics and Public Policy Department
3641 Locust Walk
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6372
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 3,337
Downloads: 549
Download Rank: 27,057
Citations:  6
Footnotes:  145

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.265 seconds