View year:

  1.  20
    Review of Thomas Kelly’s Bias: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022, x + 288 pp. [REVIEW]Lennart B. Ackermans - 2024 - Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 16 (2):280–286.
  2. What Public Policy Can Be.Matthew Adler, Måns Abrahamson & Akshath Jitendranath - 2024 - Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 16 (2):201–250.
    The Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics(EJPE) interviewed Adler about his formative years (section I); his work on the theoretical foundations of public policy, zooming in onwelfare-consequentialism and social welfare functions(section II), welfarism and interpersonal comparisons(section III), the ethical deliberator and the role of the philosopher (section IV); and, finally,his views and visions for interdisciplinary work in law, economics, and philosophy,as well as his advice for graduate students in the field (section V).
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3.  20
    Elements for a Normative Theory of Privatization.Rutger Claassen - 2024 - Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 16 (2):107-135.
    Heath’s paper on privatization defends a broadly welfarist-economic approach in thinking about the legitimacy of privatizations. This approach is ‘instrumentalist’ (in contrast to deontological approaches). In this response, I accept the value of an instrumentalist approach to privatization, but argue against Heath’s welfarist version of it, and argue in favor an alternative. First, the ends we seek when thinking about socially vital goods (our theory of public interests) should go beyond Pareto-efficiency. Second, as to the means we employ to realize (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  11
    Public Provision in Democratic Societies.Martin O’Neill - 2024 - Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 16 (2):136-166.
    If we hope to see values of equality and democracy embodied in our societies’ institutions, then we have a range of good reasons to favor expansive public provision of goods and services, and to oppose many forms of privatization. While Joseph Heath is right to argue that there are at least some forms of ‘anodyne privatization’, and while he is also right to argue for a more nuanced philosophical debate about the different dimensions of choice between forms of public and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues