- PII
- S30346177S0424738825030014-1
- DOI
- 10.7868/S3034617725030014
- Publication type
- Article
- Status
- Published
- Authors
- Volume/ Edition
- Volume 61 / Issue number 3
- Pages
- 5-16
- Abstract
- The need to fix a specific form of individual utility functions in the social welfare functional proposed by A. Bergson raises the question of the presence of metrics, the uniform application of any of which to all members of the society under consideration makes possible to solve this problem on an objective basis. The method of “composite good” is considered, which involves linking the numbering of hypersurfaces of indifference with the “scalar value” of the bundle of goods with an invariable structure belonging to each of them. It is shown that its use in the maximization of the “bergsonian” under given resource constraints makes it possible to determine the social optimum with an accuracy of the selected composition of the respective bundle and the indicators of its “marginal numbering” for each member of society. The limitations of this method make it necessary to appeal to the very nature of the ordinalist paradigm. Arguments are given in favor of the “logical castling” of the concepts of “utility” and “preference” and the transition on this basis to an “updated cardinalist approach”, within the framework of which the concept of “utility” would be applied not to individual goods, but to their bundles. In the final part of the article, it is shown that the Bergsonian format is not necessary, as its author believed, for the social optimum to be characterized by Pareto efficiency. The same result can be achieved by using the function of social utility, the arguments of which are the quantities of goods at the disposal of each member of society, provided the constraints of the corresponding model include the demand for the equality of the marginal rates of substitution of goods for each other for all members of society.
- Keywords
- индивидуальный и общественный выбор функционал общественного благосостояния А. Бергсона («бергсониан») метод «композитного блага» согласование индивидуальных и общественных интересов ординалистская теория полезности «обновленный кардинализм»
- Date of publication
- 18.12.2025
- Year of publication
- 2025
- Number of purchasers
- 0
- Views
- 32
References
- 1. Маркс К. (1961). Критика Готской программы. В кн.: К. Маркс, Ф. Энгельс «Сочинения». Изд. 2-е. М.: Госполитиздат. Т. 19. С. 9–32.
- 2. Маршалл А. (1993). Принципы экономической науки. Пер. с англ. М.: Прогресс.
- 3. Некипелов А. (2023). Поиск социального оптимума: погоня за призраком? // Вестник Российской академии наук. Т. 93. № 5. С. 415–427.
- 4. Некипелов А. (2024). О возможности формирования обновленной парадигмы теорий индивидуального и группового выбора // Экономика Северо-Запада: проблемы и перспективы развития. Т. 76. № 1. С. 33–43.
- 5. Nekipelov A. (2024). On the possibility of forming an updated paradigm of theories of individual and group choice. Economics of the North-East: Problems and Prospects of Development, 76 (1), 33–43 (in Russian).
- 6. Arrow K. (1951). Social choice and individual values. N.Y., L.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chapman Hall.
- 7. Bentham J. (1780). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. London: T. Payne and Sons.
- 8. Bergson A. (1938). A reformulation of certain aspects of welfare economics. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 52, 310–334.
- 9. Houthakker H.S. (1950). Revealed preference and the utility function. Economica. New Series, 17 (66), 159–174.
- 10. Kreps D.A. (1990). Course in microeconomic theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- 11. Lange O. (1942). The foundations of welfare economics. Econometrica, 10, July–October, 215–228.
- 12. Lerner A. (1944). Economics of Control. N.Y.: The Macmillan Co.
- 13. Samuelson P.A. (1947). Foundations of economic analysis. 6th ed. Bombay, Calcutta, Madras: Oxford University Press.
- 14. Samuelson P.A. (1948). Consumption theory in terms of revealed preference. Economica. New Series, 15 (60), November, 243–253.
- 15. Silberberg E. (1990). The structure of economics. A mathematical analysis. 2nd ed. N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
