Egalitarian justice and expected value

According to all-luck egalitarianism, the differential distributive effects of both brute luck, which defines the outcome of risks which are not deliberately taken, and option luck, which defines the outcome of deliberate gambles, are unjust. Exactly how to correct the effects of option luck is, however, a complex issue. This article argues that (a) option luck should be neutralized not just by correcting luck among gamblers, but among the community as a whole, because it would be unfair for gamblers as a group to be disadvantaged relative to non-gamblers by bad option luck; (b) individuals should receive the warranted expected results of their gambles, except insofar as individuals blamelessly lacked the ability to ascertain which expectations were warranted; and (c) where societal resources are insufficient to deliver expected results to gamblers, gamblers should receive a lesser distributive share which is in proportion to the expected results. Where all-luck egalitarianism is understood in this way, it allows risk-takers to impose externalities on non-risk-takers, which seems counterintuitive. This may, however, be an advantage as it provides a luck egalitarian rationale for assisting ‘negligent victims’

Fair optimal tax with endogenous productivities

What is a good incentive-compatible policy when one wants to respect individual choices of labor and human capital but eliminate inequalities due to unequal access to human capital and different returns to human capital, and when earnings and human capital expenditures are the only verifiable variables? We propose a social ordering that incorporates this goal and we analyze the evaluation of tax reforms and the properties of optimal linear and non-linear taxes. For reform evaluation and for optimal non-linear taxation, the focus is on the situation of individuals with the most disadvantaged characteristics who work full time and spend a certain (high) amount in human capital

Optimal Climate Policy and the Future of World Economic Development

How much should the present generations sacrifice to reduce emissions today, in order to reduce the future harms of climate change? Within climate economics, debate on this question has been focused on so-called “ethical parameters” of social time preference and inequality aversion. We show that optimal climate policy similarly importantly depends on the future of the developing world. In particular, although global poverty is falling and the economic lives of the poor are improving worldwide, leading models of climate economics may be too optimistic about two central predictions: future population growth in poor countries, and future convergence in total factor productivity (TFP). We report results of small modifications to a standard model: under plausible scenarios for high future population growth (especially in sub-Saharan Africa) and for low future TFP convergence, we find that optimal near-term carbon taxes could be substantially larger

Axiomatic Bargaining Theory on Opportunity Assignments

This paper discusses issues of axiomatic bargaining problems over opportunity assignments. The fair arbitrator uses the principle of "equal opportunity" for all players to make the recommendation on re- source allocations. A framework in such a context is developed and several classical solutions to standard bargaining problems are reformulated and axiomatically characterized. Working Paper 06-4

Poverty index with time-varying consumption and income distributions

Starting from a stochastic agent-based model to represent market exchange in a developing economy, we study time variations of the probability density function of income with simultaneous variation of the consumption deprivation (CD), where CD represents the shortfall in consumption from the saturation level of an essential commodity, cereal. Together, these two models combine income-expenditure-based market dynamics with time variations in consumption due to income. In this new unified theoretical structure, exchange of trade in assets is only allowed when the income exceeds consumption-deprivation while CD itself is endogenously obtained from a separate kinetic model. Our results reveal that the nature of time variation of the CD function leads to a downward trend in the threshold level of consumption of basic necessities, suggesting a possible dietary transition in terms of lower saturation level of food-grain consumption, possibly through an improvement in the level of living. The new poverty index, defined as CD, is amenable to approximate probabilistic prediction within a short time horizon. A major achievement of this work is the intrinsic independence of the poverty index from an exogenous poverty line, making it more objective for policy formulation as opposed to existing poverty indices in the literature

The impact of human health co-benefits on evaluations of global climate policy

The health co-benefits of CO2 mitigation can provide a strong incentive for climate policy through reductions in air pollutant emissions that occur when targeting shared sources. However, reducing air pollutant emissions may also have an important co-harm, as the aerosols they form produce net cooling overall. Nevertheless, aerosol impacts have not been fully incorporated into cost-benefit modeling that estimates how much the world should optimally mitigate. Here we find that when both co-benefits and co-harms are taken fully into account, optimal climate policy results in immediate net benefits globally, overturning previous findings from cost-benefit models that omit these effects. The global health benefits from climate policy could reach trillions of dollars annually, but will importantly depend on the air quality policies that nations adopt independently of climate change. Depending on how society values better health, economically optimal levels of mitigation may be consistent with a target of 2 °C or lower

Priority for the Worse Off and the Social Cost of Carbon

The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a monetary measure of the harms from carbon emission. Specifically, it is the reduction in current consumption that produces a loss in social welfare equivalent to that caused by the emission of a ton of CO2. The standard approach is to calculate the SCC using a discounted-utilitarian social welfare function (SWF)—one that simply adds up the well-being numbers (utilities) of individuals, as discounted by a weighting factor that decreases with time. The discounted-utilitarian SWF has been criticized both for ignoring the distribution of well-being, and for including an arbitrary preference for earlier generations. Here, we use a prioritarian SWF, with no time-discount factor, to calculate the SCC in the integrated assessment model RICE. Prioritarianism is a well-developed concept in ethics and theoretical welfare economics, but has been, thus far, little used in climate scholarship. The core idea is to give greater weight to well-being changes affecting worse off individuals. We find substantial differences between the discounted-utilitarian and non-discounted prioritarian SCC