Welfare Propositions of Economics and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility¶
Kaldor, N. (1939). Welfare Propositions of Economics and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility. The Economic Journal, 49(195), 549-552.
Cited by¶
5 citations across 5 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Cost–Benefit Analysis
- The Kaldor-Hicks compensation principle
This sourceEstablishes the Kaldor compensation principle (potential Pareto improvement: gainers could compensate losers without requiring actual compensation), operationalized in standard CBA benefit-cost logic. Verified support. Note: vol/issue is 49 no. 195 (the prime cites no. 196 — minor detail fix).
- The Kaldor-Hicks compensation principle
- Pareto Efficiency
- The concept was formalized through twentieth-century welfare economics via a sequence of foundational contributions: Hicks and Kaldor's compensation criteria (1939),
This sourceEstablishes the Kaldor compensation principle (potential Pareto improvement via compensation-from-gainers-to-losers, without requiring actual compensation); operationalized in standard CBA benefit-cost-ratio logic.
- The concept was formalized through twentieth-century welfare economics via a sequence of foundational contributions: Hicks and Kaldor's compensation criteria (1939),
Domain-specific¶
- Kaldor-Hicks Efficiency
- Kaldor's 1939 note worked through an illustration it quoted from Harrod, the repeal of Britain's Corn Laws
SupportedVerified against the source
- Kaldor's 1939 note worked through an illustration it quoted from Harrod, the repeal of Britain's Corn Laws
Mechanisms¶
- Compensation Adequacy Review
- It is the mechanism that blocks the Kaldor-Hicks dodge
This sourceThe Kaldor compensation criterion requires only potential compensation by winners, not that losers actually receive it.
- It is the mechanism that blocks the Kaldor-Hicks dodge
- Distributional Loss Review
- Its central failure mode is a floor set cynically low, or a compensation test satisfied by compensation that could be paid but never is — either one launders the very harm the review claims to check.
This sourceUses a potential-compensation criterion that does not require compensation actually to be paid.
- Its central failure mode is a floor set cynically low, or a compensation test satisfied by compensation that could be paid but never is — either one launders the very harm the review claims to check.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 5 citations: 1 supported. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 1 other way.
Registry ID ref:1a086d846f39 · see in the full table