Justifying Sustainability
In the framework of ethical social choice theory, sustainability is justified by efficiency and equity as ethical axioms. These axioms correspond to the Suppes–Sen grading principle. In technologies that are productive in a certain sense, the set of Suppes–Sen maximal utility paths is shown to equal...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of environmental economics and management 2001-05, Vol.41 (3), p.252-268 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 268 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 252 |
| container_title | Journal of environmental economics and management |
| container_volume | 41 |
| creator | Asheim, Geir B. Buchholz, Wolfgang Tungodden, Bertil |
| description | In the framework of ethical social choice theory, sustainability is justified by efficiency and equity as ethical axioms. These axioms correspond to the Suppes–Sen grading principle. In technologies that are productive in a certain sense, the set of Suppes–Sen maximal utility paths is shown to equal the set of non-decreasing and efficient paths. Since any such path is sustainable, efficiency and equity can thus be used to deem any unsustainable path as ethically unacceptable. This finding is contrasted with results that seem to indicate that an infinite number of generations cannot be treated equally. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1006/jeem.2000.1137 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38253904</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0095069600911379</els_id><sourcerecordid>73456410</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c575t-5459f60d93e3fe743d5c62019ff5f2d8abe74413dd79396e7013218adcfc06d13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1LAzEQxYMoWKtXwZt48LZ1stlkk6MUv0rBg3oOaTLRlHa3JruF_vdmqXgQxMMkk-H3HskLIecUJhRA3CwR15MSIB8pqw_IiIISBVSVOiQjAMULEEock5OUlpmSUIsRuZj1qQt-F5r3y5fcmtCYRViFbndKjrxZJTz73sfk7f7udfpYzJ8fnqa388LymncFr7jyApxiyDzWFXPcihKo8p770kmzyMOKMudqxZTAGigrqTTOegvCUTYm13vfTWw_e0ydXodkcbUyDbZ90kyWnCmo_gVpLRUHpv4HKy5VTWUGr36By7aPTX6tLilnUjIY3CZ7yMY2pYheb2JYm7jTFPQQvB6C10Pwegg-C2Z7QcQN2h8aEQfQNHqrmaloXna5sm5oQy6WazOMeKlLIfVHt85mcm-G-Qu2AaNONmBj0YWIttOuDX_d4wtDyZ_g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>215388309</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Justifying Sustainability</title><source>RePEc</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Asheim, Geir B. ; Buchholz, Wolfgang ; Tungodden, Bertil</creator><creatorcontrib>Asheim, Geir B. ; Buchholz, Wolfgang ; Tungodden, Bertil</creatorcontrib><description>In the framework of ethical social choice theory, sustainability is justified by efficiency and equity as ethical axioms. These axioms correspond to the Suppes–Sen grading principle. In technologies that are productive in a certain sense, the set of Suppes–Sen maximal utility paths is shown to equal the set of non-decreasing and efficient paths. Since any such path is sustainable, efficiency and equity can thus be used to deem any unsustainable path as ethically unacceptable. This finding is contrasted with results that seem to indicate that an infinite number of generations cannot be treated equally.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0095-0696</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1096-0449</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1006/jeem.2000.1137</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEEMDI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Economic efficiency ; Economic models ; Efficiency ; Environmental economics ; Equity ; ethical preferences ; Ethics ; Public choice ; Social theory ; Studies ; Suppes–Sen grading principle ; Sustainability ; Sustainable development ; Technology</subject><ispartof>Journal of environmental economics and management, 2001-05, Vol.41 (3), p.252-268</ispartof><rights>2001 Academic Press</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc. May 2001</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c575t-5459f60d93e3fe743d5c62019ff5f2d8abe74413dd79396e7013218adcfc06d13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c575t-5459f60d93e3fe743d5c62019ff5f2d8abe74413dd79396e7013218adcfc06d13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jeem.2000.1137$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,4005,27922,27923,45993</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeejeeman/v_3a41_3ay_3a2001_3ai_3a3_3ap_3a252-268.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Asheim, Geir B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchholz, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tungodden, Bertil</creatorcontrib><title>Justifying Sustainability</title><title>Journal of environmental economics and management</title><description>In the framework of ethical social choice theory, sustainability is justified by efficiency and equity as ethical axioms. These axioms correspond to the Suppes–Sen grading principle. In technologies that are productive in a certain sense, the set of Suppes–Sen maximal utility paths is shown to equal the set of non-decreasing and efficient paths. Since any such path is sustainable, efficiency and equity can thus be used to deem any unsustainable path as ethically unacceptable. This finding is contrasted with results that seem to indicate that an infinite number of generations cannot be treated equally.</description><subject>Economic efficiency</subject><subject>Economic models</subject><subject>Efficiency</subject><subject>Environmental economics</subject><subject>Equity</subject><subject>ethical preferences</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Public choice</subject><subject>Social theory</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Suppes–Sen grading principle</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><subject>Technology</subject><issn>0095-0696</issn><issn>1096-0449</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1LAzEQxYMoWKtXwZt48LZ1stlkk6MUv0rBg3oOaTLRlHa3JruF_vdmqXgQxMMkk-H3HskLIecUJhRA3CwR15MSIB8pqw_IiIISBVSVOiQjAMULEEock5OUlpmSUIsRuZj1qQt-F5r3y5fcmtCYRViFbndKjrxZJTz73sfk7f7udfpYzJ8fnqa388LymncFr7jyApxiyDzWFXPcihKo8p770kmzyMOKMudqxZTAGigrqTTOegvCUTYm13vfTWw_e0ydXodkcbUyDbZ90kyWnCmo_gVpLRUHpv4HKy5VTWUGr36By7aPTX6tLilnUjIY3CZ7yMY2pYheb2JYm7jTFPQQvB6C10Pwegg-C2Z7QcQN2h8aEQfQNHqrmaloXna5sm5oQy6WazOMeKlLIfVHt85mcm-G-Qu2AaNONmBj0YWIttOuDX_d4wtDyZ_g</recordid><startdate>20010501</startdate><enddate>20010501</enddate><creator>Asheim, Geir B.</creator><creator>Buchholz, Wolfgang</creator><creator>Tungodden, Bertil</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc</general><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20010501</creationdate><title>Justifying Sustainability</title><author>Asheim, Geir B. ; Buchholz, Wolfgang ; Tungodden, Bertil</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c575t-5459f60d93e3fe743d5c62019ff5f2d8abe74413dd79396e7013218adcfc06d13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Economic efficiency</topic><topic>Economic models</topic><topic>Efficiency</topic><topic>Environmental economics</topic><topic>Equity</topic><topic>ethical preferences</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Public choice</topic><topic>Social theory</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Suppes–Sen grading principle</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><topic>Technology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Asheim, Geir B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchholz, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tungodden, Bertil</creatorcontrib><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of environmental economics and management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Asheim, Geir B.</au><au>Buchholz, Wolfgang</au><au>Tungodden, Bertil</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Justifying Sustainability</atitle><jtitle>Journal of environmental economics and management</jtitle><date>2001-05-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>252</spage><epage>268</epage><pages>252-268</pages><issn>0095-0696</issn><eissn>1096-0449</eissn><coden>JEEMDI</coden><abstract>In the framework of ethical social choice theory, sustainability is justified by efficiency and equity as ethical axioms. These axioms correspond to the Suppes–Sen grading principle. In technologies that are productive in a certain sense, the set of Suppes–Sen maximal utility paths is shown to equal the set of non-decreasing and efficient paths. Since any such path is sustainable, efficiency and equity can thus be used to deem any unsustainable path as ethically unacceptable. This finding is contrasted with results that seem to indicate that an infinite number of generations cannot be treated equally.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1006/jeem.2000.1137</doi><tpages>17</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0095-0696 |
| ispartof | Journal of environmental economics and management, 2001-05, Vol.41 (3), p.252-268 |
| issn | 0095-0696 1096-0449 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38253904 |
| source | RePEc; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Economic efficiency Economic models Efficiency Environmental economics Equity ethical preferences Ethics Public choice Social theory Studies Suppes–Sen grading principle Sustainability Sustainable development Technology |
| title | Justifying Sustainability |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T00%3A53%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Justifying%20Sustainability&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20environmental%20economics%20and%20management&rft.au=Asheim,%20Geir%20B.&rft.date=2001-05-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=252&rft.epage=268&rft.pages=252-268&rft.issn=0095-0696&rft.eissn=1096-0449&rft.coden=JEEMDI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1006/jeem.2000.1137&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E73456410%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=215388309&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0095069600911379&rfr_iscdi=true |