With his characteristic acuteness and lucidity, William Baumol, one of America's foremost economists, tackles the problem of equity considerations in welfare economics by applying the novel "superfairness" criterion to the distribution of resources, product, income, and wealth that arises from economic decisions.

This work questions how governments should balance the aims of justice and economic efficiency when intervening in the economy. It covers the main advances of fairness theory and reviews the experimental work of economists as well as the more standard approaches of moral philosophers.

What drives popular support for state-enforced competition policy? What is it about antitrust law that garners approval from both the public and courts, to the point of demonizing large firms convicted of antitrust offenses? In this book Adi Ayal argues that the populist roots of antitrust are still with us, guiding sentiment towards a legal regime that has otherwise shifted towards economic analysis. Antitrust is very much about fairness and morality; this book assesses how modern policy has hijacked popular support - based on traditional conceptions of political and economic power - to combat market power in narrowly defined micro-markets. Beginning with history, but delving into moral and political philosophy, Professor Ayal shows how arguments concerning fairness in antitrust apply both to monopolists and their victims. Fairness thus requires a balancing test based on context and respecting the rights of all parties involved. While traditionally fairness arguments were used to justify intervention where economic analysis did not, this book assesses them from first principles, to show that pure efficiency analysis is flawed from a moral standpoint when the state intervenes. Protecting weak consumers from strong monopolists may carry rhetorical weight, but the reality of antitrust is that the state is much more powerful than almost all firms it regulates. Protecting the strong from the weak, especially when 'weak' consumers hold legal power and influence, might very well be a moral imperative. This book offers a philosophical account of the conundrum facing competition policy which challenges widely-held yet often implicit and unfounded beliefs.

Commonly shared resources that include the oceans, atmosphere fisheries and other components of the environment are managed by consensus amongst nations. This study examines the complex issue of these shared resources from a multi-disciplinary viewpoint.

Who benefits from the interconnected processes often referred to as globalization? Is it a relatively few people, with most others either being harmed or at least not helped? Are the good things that globalization produces, whatever they are, widely shared? What processes lead us in one direction or another? This book examines a key dimension of globalization: its fairness. It investigates the meaning of and role fairness plays when public institutions are faced with the challenges and opportunities of globalization. Here a distinguished group of contributors, including both academics and practitioners, focuses on East and Southeast Asia, but the relevance of the issues discussed extends well beyond these regions. They present a broad-ranging examination of the intersections between fairness, globalization, and public institutions. Contributors: Doug Allen, Walt T. Anderson, Ron Brown, Jim Dator, Jingping Ding, Christopher Grandy, Sohail Inayatullah,Yong-duck Jung, Martin Khor, Yoshiko Kojo, Le Van Anh, Ivana Milojevic, Ryo Oshiba, Edgar A. Porter, Dick Pratt, Fred Riggs, James Rosenau,Yongseok Seo, Chanto Sisowath, Shunichi Takekawa. An electronic version of this book is freely available thanks to the support of libraries working with Knowledge Unlatched, a collaborative initiative designed to make high-quality books open access for the public good. The open-access version of this book is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which means that the work may be freely downloaded and shared for non-commercial purposes, provided credit is given to the author. Derivative works and commercial uses require permission from the publisher.

In theory and practice, the notion of fairness is far from simple. The principle is often elusive and subject to confusion, even in institutions of law, usage, and custom. In Fairness, Nicholas Rescher aims to liberate this concept from misunderstandings by showing how its definitive characteristics prevent it from being absorbed by such related conceptions as paternalistic benevolence, radical egalitarianism, and social harmonization. Rescher demonstrates that equality before the state is an instrument of justice, not of social utility or public welfare, and argues that the notion of fairness stops well short of a literal egalitarianism. Rescher disposes of the confusions arising from economists' penchant to focus on individual preferences, from decision theorists' concern for averting envy, and from political theorists' sympathy for egalitarianism. In their place he shows how the idea of distributive equity forms the core of the concept of fairness in matters of distributive justice. The coordination of shares with valid claims is the crux of the concept of fairness. In Rescher's view, this means that the pursuit of fairness requires objective rather than subjective evaluation of the goods being shared. This is something quite different from subjective equity based on the personal evaluation of goods by those laying claim to them. Insofar as subjective equity is a concern, the appropriate procedure for its realization is a process of maximum value distribution. Further, Rescher demonstrates that in matters of distributive justice, the distinction between new ownership and preexisting ownership is pivotal and calls for proceeding on very different principles depending on the case. How one should proceed depends on context, and what is adjudged fair is pragmatic, in that there are different requirements for effectiveness in achieving the aims and purposes of the sort of distribution that is intended. Rescher concludes that fairness is a fundamentally ethical concept. Its distinctive modus operandi contrasts sharply with the aims of paternalism, preference-maximizing, or economic advantage. Fairness will be of interest to philosophers, economists, and political scientists.