Utilitarianism for infinite utility streams: A new welfare criterion and its axiomatic characterization

Additive representation of separable preferences over infinite products

“…(i) Under interpretation (i), statement (5) is sometimes called monotonicity, while Π fin -invariance implies no time preferences. In this case, u is a single-period utility function for the individual or population in question, and Theorem 2 is comparable to recent characterizations of 'intertemporal utilitarianism' by Banerjee (2006) and Basu and Mitra (2007) (see §5.2 for more details). Meanwhile, Theorem 3 is similar to Theorem 5 of Fleurbaey and Michel (2003).…”

“…Meanwhile, Theorem 3 is similar to Theorem 5 of Fleurbaey and Michel (2003). These models all assume X = R (with standard ordering) and I = N. Banerjee (2006) and Basu and Mitra (2007) do not utilize the ordering of N, but Fleurbaey and Michel's (2003) * R-valued SWF on R N does: it is defined in terms of sums over the sets [1 . .…”

Sustainable recursive social welfare functions

“…The proof of this proposition employs the leximin and undiscounted utilitarian swrs for infinite streams that have been axiomatized in recent contributions (see, Asheim and Tungodden 2004a;Basu and Mitra 2007;Bossert et al 2007).…”

“…Lemma 7 shows that any optimal resource path 0k , with associated well-being stream 0x , satisfiesx t ≥ x * andk t ≥ k * for t ≥ 0. Asheim and Tungodden (2004a), Basu and Mitra (2007), and Bossert et al (2007) define different incomplete leximin and undiscounted utilitarian swrs, each of which is given an axiomatic characterization. Denote by one such incomplete swr.…”

Infinite-horizon choice functions

“…Given such technological assumptions, this result also implies that social welfare relations like those considered in Asheim and Tungodden (2004), Basu and Mitra (2007), and Bossert, Sprumont and Suzumura (2007), which all satisfy the Suppes-Sen principle, yield sustainable consumption streams as maximal elements as long as maximal elements exist.…”