Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Utilitarianism and Economic Theory

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

  • 808 Accesses

Abstract

Utilitarianism is a family of moral and political philosophies according to which general utility or social welfare is ultimately the sole ethical value or good to be maximized. Normative economics endorsed a hedonistic version of utilitarianism from the latter part of the 18th century well into the 20th century. Despite the ordinalist revolution, some version of utilitarianism continues implicitly to serve as the ethical basis for economic policy judgements. While there are signs that this may be changing, economic theory has not yet moved decisively beyond utilitarianism, nor is it clear that it should.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 6,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 8,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Arrow, K.J. 1951. Social choice and individual values, 2nd rev. edn., New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K.J. 1973. Some ordinalist-utilitarian notes on Rawls’s theory of justice. Journal of Philosophy 70: 245–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K.J. 1977. Extended sympathy and the possibility of social choice. American Economic Review 67: 219–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • d’Aspremont, C., and L. Gevers. 1977. Equity and the informational basis of collective choice. Review of Economic Studies 46: 199–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, J. 1789. In An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation, ed. J.H. Burns and H.L.A. Hart, 1970. London: Athlone Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, J. 1830. In Constitutional code, ed. F. Rosen and J.H. Burns, Vol. 1, 1983. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binmore, K. 1994. Playing fair. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binmore, K. 1998. Just playing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binmore, K. 2005. Natural justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blackorby, C., W. Bossert, and D. Donaldson. 2005. Population issues in social choice theory, welfare economics, and ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, R. 1992. Morality, utilitarianism, and rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creedy, J. 1986. Edgeworth and the development of neoclassical economics. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumberland, R. 1672. In De Legibus Naturae: A treatise of the laws of the nature, ed. J. Parkin, 2005. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deschamps, R., and L. Gevers. 1978. Leximin and utilitarian rules: a joint characterization. Journal of Economic Theory 17: 143–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, P.A. 1967. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility: Comment. Journal of Political Economy 75: 765–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, P.A., and J.A. Mirrlees. 1974. Optimal taxation and public production, I: production efficiency, and II. tax rules. American Economic Review 61(8–27): 261–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin, R. 1977. Taking rights seriously. London: Duckworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgeworth, F.Y. 1877. New and old methods of ethics, or ‘Physical Ethics’ and ‘Methods of Ethics’. Oxford and London: James Parker. Repr. in Newman (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgeworth, F.Y. 1881. Mathematical psychics: An essay on the application of mathematics to the moral sciences. London: Kegan Paul. Repr. in Newman (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgeworth, F.Y. 1897. The pure theory of taxation. Economic Journal 7: 46–70, 226–38, 550–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, R.B. 1979. Pleasures and pains: A theory of qualitative hedonism. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feiwel, G.R., eds. 1987. Arrow and the foundations of the theory of economic policy. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, F. 2004. Pleasure and the good life: Concerning the nature, varieties, and plausibility of hedonism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbard, A.F. 1987. Ordinal utilitarianism. In Feiwel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbard, A.F. 1990. Wise choices, Apt feelings. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, P.J. 1976. Equity, Arrow’s conditions and Rawls’ difference principle. Econometrica 44: 793–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, P.J. 1977. Dual interpersonal comparisons of utility and the welfare economics of income distribution. Journal of Public Economics 7: 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, P.J. 1987. On reconciling Arrow’s theory of social choice with Harsanyi’s fundamental utilitarianism. In Feiwel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R.M. 1981. Moral thinking: Its method, levels and point. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, J.C. 1955. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Journal of Political Economy 63: 309–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, J.C. 1977. Rational behavior and bargaining equilibrium in games and social situations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, J.C. 1992. Game and decision theoretic models in ethics. In Handbook of game theory, ed. R.J. Aumann and S. Hart, Vol. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume, D. 1751. In An enquiry concerning the principles of morals, ed. T.L. Beauchamp, 1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutcheson, F. 1755. In A system of moral philosophy, ed. D. Carey, 2000. London/New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jevons, W.S. 1874. Utilitarianism. In Pure logic and other minor works of W.S. Jevons, ed. R. Adamson and H.A. Jevons, 1890. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., E. Diener, and N. Schwarz. 1999. Well-Being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, P.J. 1990. Utilitarianism and distributive justice. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lively, J., and J. Rees. 1978. Utilitarian logic and politics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, A. 1884. On utilitarianism: A summum bonum. In The early economic writings of Alfred Marshall, 1867–1890, ed. J.K. Whitaker, Vol. 2, 1975. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maskin, E.S. 1978. A theorem on utilitarianism. Review of Economic Studies 45: 93–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. 1820. An essay on government. In James Mill: Political writings, ed. T. Ball, 1992. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J.S. 1859. On liberty. In Collected works, ed. J.M. Robson, Vol. 18, 1977. Toronto/London: University of Toronto Press/Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J.S. 1861a. Utilitarianism. In Collected works, ed. J.M. Robson, Vol. 10, 1969. Toronto/London: University of Toronto Press/Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J.S. 1861b. Considerations on representative government. In Collected works, ed. J.M. Robson, Vol. 19, 1977. Toronto/London: University of Toronto Press/Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirrlees, J.A. 1971. An exploration in the theory of optimal income taxation. Review of Economic Studies 38: 175–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirrlees, J.A. 1982. The economic uses of utilitarianism. In Sen and Williams.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, W.C. 1918. Bentham’s felicific calculus. Political Science Quarterly 33: 161–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongin, P. 2006. A concept of progress for normative economics. Economics and Philosophy 22: 19–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongin, P., and C. d’Aspremont. 1998. Utility theory and ethics. In Handbook of utility theory, ed. S. Barbera, P. Hammond, and C. Seidl, Vol. 1. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G.E. 1903. Principia ethica, 1959. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G.E. 1912. Ethics, 1958. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, P. 2003. F.Y. Edgeworth: Mathematical psychics and further papers on political economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, Y.-K. 1975. Bentham or Bergson? Finite sensibility, utility functions, and social welfare functions. Review of Economic Studies 42: 545–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, Y.-K. 1985. Some fundamental issues in social welfare. In Issues in contemporary microeconomics and welfare, ed. G.R. Feiwell. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, Y.-K., and P. Singer. 1981. An argument for utilitarianism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 11: 229–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigou, A.C. 1920. The economics of welfare, 4th rev. edn. London: Macmillan, 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. 1971. A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. 1993. Political liberalism. 2nd ed, 2002. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. 1988. Liberal utilitarianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. 2001. Welfare (philosophical aspects). In International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences, ed. N.J. Smelser and P.B. Bates, Vol. 25. London: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. 2006a. Liberal rights in a Pareto-optimal code. Utilitas 18: 61–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. 2006b. Genes, memes and justice. Analyse & Kritik 28: 32–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. 2007a. Mill’s neo-Athenian model of liberal democracy. In J.S. Mill’s political thought: A bicentennial reassessment, ed. N. Urbinati and A. Zakaras. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. 2007b. Mill’s radical liberalism. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. 2007c. Classical ordinalist utilitarianism. Unpublished working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, J. 2009. The interpretation of maximizing utilitarianism, and distributive justice. Social Philosophy and Policy 26(Winter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, F. 1983. Jeremy Bentham and representative democracy: A study of the constitutional code. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheffler, S. 1982. The Rejection of consequentialism, Rev. edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K. 1970. Collective choice and social welfare. San Francisco: Holden-Day.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K. 1979. Utilitarianism and welfarism. Journal of Philosophy 76: 463–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K. 1980. Plural utility. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 81: 193–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K. 1982. Choice, welfare and measurement, 1997. Oxford: Blackwell. Repr. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K. 1985. Commodities and capabilities, 1999. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Repr. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K. 2002. Rationality and freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K. 2007. Freedom and justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K., and B.A.O. Williams, eds. 1982. Utilitarianism and beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidgwick, H. 1874. The methods of ethics. 7th ed, 1907. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidgwick, H. 1877. Bentham and Benthamism in politics and ethics. In Essays on ethics and method: Henry Sidgwick, ed. M.G. Singer, 2000. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidgwick, H. 1886. Outlines of the history of ethics. 5th ed, 1902. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J.J.C., and B.A.O. Williams. 1977. Utilitarianism: For and against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J.E. 1987. Pareto efficient and optimal taxation and the new welfare economics. In Handbook of public economics, ed. A.J. Auerbach and M. Feldstein, Vol. 2. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. http://link.springer.com/referencework/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5

    Jonathan Riley

Authors
  1. Jonathan Riley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Copyright information

© 2018 Macmillan Publishers Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Riley, J. (2018). Utilitarianism and Economic Theory. In: The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_2052

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation