Advertisement

Intergenerational Equity in a Model of Endogenous Growth

  • Claude d’Aspremont
  • Louis-André Gérard-Varet
  • Philippe Michel
Chapter
Part of the International Economic Association Series book series (IEA)

Abstract

The main difficulties in trying to derive and apply social welfare criteria, such as utilitarianism or maximin, to the problem of intergenerational justice come from time-irreversibility. Future generations cannot compensate for a sacrifice made by earlier ones, or ask for just sharing of past resources that were wasted. There is a possible altruistic approach to intergenerational equity. However, it requires that the altruism of future generations be secured. In any case, intergenerational equity is not only a matter of gifts from present to future generations. It is also an issue of ‘retro-gifts’ which have to be socially contracted. In economic terms, this is translated into the problem of finding a just rate of savings, taking into account both the well-being of the present generation and the productivity of capital for future generations and considering the impossibility of ex post transfers from future generations to present ones.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allais, M. (1947) Economic et Intérêt, Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.Google Scholar
  2. Arrow, K. J. (1962) ‘The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 80, pp. 155–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arrow, K.J. (1973) ‘Rawls’s Principle of Just Savings’, Swedish Journal of Economics, vol. 75, pp. 323–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dasgupta, P. (1974) ‘On Some Alternative Criteria for Justice between Generations’, Journal of Public Economics, vol. 3, pp. 405–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Diamond, P. A. (1965) ‘National Debt in a Neoclassical Model’, American Economic Review, vol. 55, pp. 1126–50.Google Scholar
  6. Kolm, S. C. (1971) Justice et Équité, Paris: CEPREMAP. Reprinted Paris: CNRS, 1972. Translated as Justice and Equity, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  7. Lerner, A. P. (1959) ‘Consumption-Loan Interest and Money’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 67, pp. 512–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lucas, R. J. (1988) ‘On the Mechanics of Economic Development’, Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 22, pp. 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Michel, P. (1991) ‘Economic Growth from a Normative Point of View: Historical Background and New Considerations’, Working paper. No. 91A13, GREQE.Google Scholar
  10. Moulin, H. (1988) Axioms of Cooperative Decision Making, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Phelps, E. S. (1961) ‘The Golden-Rule of Accumulation: A Fable for Growth Men’, American Economic Review, vol. 51, pp. 638–43.Google Scholar
  12. Rawls, J. (1971) A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Romer, P. M. (1986) ‘Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 94, pp. 1002–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Romer, P. M. (1989) ‘Capital Accumulation in the Theory of Long-Run Growth’, in R. J. Barrow, (ed.), Modern Business Cycle Theory, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. Samuelson, P. A. (1958) ‘An Exact Consumption-Loan Model of Interest with or without the Social Contrivance of Money’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 66, pp. 467–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Solow, R. M. (1974) ‘Intergenerational Equity and Exhaustible Resources’, Review of Economic Studies, Symposium, pp. 29–45.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Economic Association 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claude d’Aspremont
    • 1
  • Louis-André Gérard-Varet
    • 2
  • Philippe Michel
    • 3
  1. 1.CORECatholic University of LouvainLouvain-La-NeuveBelgium
  2. 2.Institute for Advanced Studies in the Social SciencesMarseillesFrance
  3. 3.University of the MediterraneanMarseillesFrance

Personalised recommendations