Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-76mfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-24T05:33:34.236Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Problem of the Second Best: Conceptual Issues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2009

Juha Räikkä
Juha Räikkä
Affiliation:
University of Turku, jraikka@utu.fi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article I shall undertake a preliminary exploration of the notion of second best. I shall follow a three-step strategy. First, I shall introduce some applications of the theorem of the second best in different fields of philosophy and social sciences. Secondly, I shall make several conceptual distinctions related to the theorem. I aim to show that there are certain theoretical results that are similar but not identical to the theorem of the second best, and that the notion of second best is often used quite loosely. Finally, I shall try to shed some light on the question of how the theorem is description-sensitive. The overall aim of the paper is to pay attention to the generality of the problem of the second best and stress the importance of the theorem in political theory in particular.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Utilitas , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , July 2000 , pp. 204 - 218
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 The theorem of the second best is often called ‘the general theory of second best’. The theorem was first formalized by Lipsey, R. G. and Lancaster, K. J. in ‘The General Theory of Second Best’, Review of Economic Studies, xxv (1956)Google Scholar.

2 Cf. Boadway, Robin, ‘The Role of Second-Best Theory in Public Economies’, EPRU Working Papers, 1995 (Copenhagen)Google Scholar.

3 See e.g. Guesnerie, Roger, ‘General Statements on Second Best Pareto Optimality’, Journal of Mathematical Economics, x (1979)Google Scholar; Kemp, Murray C. and Wan, Henry Y. Jr, ‘The Comparison of Second-Best Equilibria: The Case of Customs Unions’, Journal of Economics, Suppl. Vol. v (1986)Google Scholar; Blackorby, Charles, ‘Economic Policy in a Second Best Environment’, Canadian Journal of Economics, XXIII (1990)Google Scholar; Blackorby, Charles, Davidson, Russell and Schworm, William, ‘The Validity of Piecemeal Second-Best Policy’, Journal of Public Economics, xlvi (1991)Google Scholar; Bovenberg, A. Lans and van der Ploeg, Frederick, Environmental Policy, Public Finance and the Labour Market in a Second-Best World, Milan, 1993Google Scholar; Lahiri, Sajal and Raimondes, Pascalis, Quotas, Partial Rent Retention and The Second Best, Aarhus, 1993Google Scholar; Beetsma, Roel and Bovenberg, A. Lans, ‘Designing Fiscal and Monetary Institutions in a Second-Best World’, Discussion Paper Series (1995), TilburgGoogle Scholar; Orosel, Gerhard O. and Schoeb, Ronnie, ‘Internalizing Externalities in Second-Best Tax Systems’, CES Working Papers (1995), MunichGoogle Scholar; Baranzini, Andrea, Second-Best Environmental Policy and Nonconvexities, Geneva, 1996Google Scholar; Gaynor, Martin, Haas-Wilson, Deborah and Vogt, William B., ‘Are Invisible Hands Good Hands? Moral Hazard, Competition and the Second Best in Health Care’, NBER Working Papers (1998), CambridgeGoogle Scholar; Aizerman, Joshua, ‘Capital Mobility in a Second Best World’, NBER Working Papers (1998), CambridgeGoogle Scholar; Goulder, Lawrence H. et al. , ‘The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second Best Setting’, NBER Working Papers (1998), CambridgeGoogle Scholar.

4 Margalit, Avishai, ‘Ideals and Second Best’, Philosophy for Education, ed. Fox, S., Jerusalem, 1983, esp. p. 77Google Scholar. See also Seymour Fox, ‘Theory into Practice (In Education)’, Philosophy for Education.

5 For a discussion on character traits and virtues, see e.g. Foot, Philippa, Virtues and Vices, Oxford, 1978, ch. 1Google Scholar.

6 More and more scholars are actively engaged in studying areas where legal and economic concerns interface, and the leading law schools have at least one full-time economist as a member of the law faculty. For a discussion, see e.g. Hirsch, Werner Z., Law and Economics: An Introductory Analysis, New York, 1979Google Scholar; Oliver, John MacDonald, Law and Economics, London, 1980Google Scholar; Samuels, Warren J. and Schmid, A. Allan (ed.), Law and Economics: An Institutional Perspective The Hague, 1981Google Scholar; Jones, Kelvin, Law and Economy: The Legal Regulation of Corporate Capital, London, 1982Google Scholar; Posner, Richard A., Economic Analysis of Law, 3rd edn., Boston, 1986Google Scholar; Cooter, Robert and Ulen, Thomas, Law and Economics, Glenview, 1988Google Scholar; Mercudo, Nicholas (ed.), Law and Economics, Dordrecht, 1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Harrison, Jeffrey L., Law and Economics in a Nutshell, St Paul, 1995, pp. 53–5Google Scholar. See also Markovits, Richard S., ‘A Basic Structure for Microeconomic Policy Analysis in Our Worse-than-Second-Best World’, Wisconsin Law Review (1975)Google Scholar; Guesnerie, Roger and Roberts, K., ‘Minimum Wage Legislation as a Second Best Policy’, European Economic Review, xxxi (1987)Google Scholar; Gollier, Christian and Schlesinger, Harris, ‘Second-Best Insurance Contract Design in an Incomplete Market’, CORE Discussion Papers (1992), Louvainla-NeuveGoogle Scholar; Monahan, George E. and Vemuri, Vijay, ‘Monotone Second-Best Optimal Contracts’, Research Working Papers (1994), Urbana-ChampaignGoogle Scholar; Ishiguro, Shingo, ‘Incomplete Contracts and Breach Remedies’, Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, c1v (1999)Google Scholar.

8 Coram, Bruce Talbot, ‘Second Best Theories and the Implications for Institutional Design’, The Theory of Institutional Design, ed. Goodin, R., New York, 1996Google Scholar. See also Goodin, Robert, ‘Political Ideals and Political Practice’, British Journal of Political Science, xxv (1995)Google Scholar. For a discussion on the role of ideals in institutional design, see e.g. van der Burg, Wibren, ‘The Morality of Aspiration’, Rediscovering Fuller: Essays on Implicit Law and Institutional Design, ed. Witteveen, W. J. and van der Burg, W., Amsterdam, 1999Google Scholar.

9 This is Goodin's example; ibid., 53.

10 Among others, Beitz, Charles evaluates the argument in his ‘Democracy in Developing Societies’, Boundaries: National Autonomy and its Limits, ed. Brown, P. G. and Shue, H., Totowa, 1981Google Scholar.

11 See e.g. Brink, David, ‘Moral Conflict and its Structure’, Philosophical Review, ciii (1994)Google Scholar.

12 Pietroski, Paul M., ‘Executing the Second Best Option’, Analysis, liv (1994)Google Scholar. See also Goldman, Holly S., ‘Doing the Best One Can’, Values and Morals, ed. Goldman, A. I. and Kim, J., Dordrecht, 1978CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jackson, Frank and Pargetter, Robert, ‘Oughts, Options, and Actualism’, Philosophical Review, xcv (1986)Google Scholar.

13 Bohman, James, ‘The Coming Age of Deliberative Democracy’, Journal of Political Philosophy, vi (1998), esp. 417Google Scholar.

14 Ackerman, Bruce A., ‘What Is Neutral about Neutrality?’, Ethics, xciii (1983), esp. 385Google Scholar.

15 Streissler, Erich and Neudeck, Werner, ‘Are there Intellectual Precursors to the Idea of Second Best Optimization?’, Journal of Economics, suppl. vol., v (1986), esp. 227CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a history of the second best, see also Guesnerie, Roger, ‘The Genealogy of Modern Theoretical Public Economics: From First Best to Second Best’, DELTA Working Papers (1994), Paris; cf. BoadwayGoogle Scholar.

16 See e.g. Margalit, 77.

17 Here I take it as self-evident that weakness of will is possible.

18 Føllesdal, Andreas, Contractualism and Bargaining, Oslo. 1993, p. 81Google Scholar. Cf. Margalit, 77 f.

19 Sher, George, Approximate Justice: Studies in Non-Ideal Theory, Lanham, 1997, p. 1Google Scholar.

20 Rawls, JohnA Theory of Justice, Oxford, 1972, p. 245 (italics added)Google Scholar. Cf. Feinberg, Joel, ‘Duty and Obligation in the Non-Ideal World’, in his Rights, Justice, and the Bounds of Liberty, Princeton, 1980, esp. pp. 256 fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 See e.g. Mishan, E. J., ‘Second Thoughts on Second Best’, Oxford Economic Papers, new series, xiv (1962)Google Scholar.

22 For such proof, see e.g. Rowley, Charles K. and Peacock, Alan T., Welfare Economics: A Liberal Restatement, London, 1975Google Scholar; Ng, Yew-Kwang, Welfare Economics, London, 1979, ch. 9Google Scholar.

23 Cf. Goodin, , ‘Political Ideals and Political Practice’, 53nGoogle Scholar.

24 If an agent thinks that the most effective way to reach social justice is to promote civil liberties and construct a welfare safety net, then it does not matter whether we ask the agent to ‘promote civil liberties and construct a welfare safety net’ or to ‘promote social justice in the most effective way’.

25 Yes, there are people who think that socialism may have value in and for itself.

26 Certain theoretical models (in decision theory) deny all interaction effects and interdependence between the various strategies and ideals that different agents happen to hold. However, while these models may have certain mathematical advantages in comparison to models that allow for dependence, perhaps they must nonetheless be rejected, since representations based on them seem to be substantively misleading. Again, cf. Goodin, , ‘Political Ideals and Political Practice’, 52Google Scholar. For an account of ‘multiple objectives’, see Keeney, Ralph L. and Raiffa, Howard, Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, Cambridge, 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 See e.g. Sen, Amartya, On Ethics & Economics, Oxford, 1987, esp. ch. 2Google Scholar; Kleindorfer, Paul R., Kunreuther, Howard C. and Schoemaker, Paul J. H., Decision Sciences: An Integrative Perspective, Cambridge, 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Larmore, Charles E., Patterns of Moral Complexity, Cambridge, 1987, esp. ch. 6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 See e.g. Cohen, L. Jonathan, ‘Verisimilitude and Legisimilitude’, What is Closer-tothe-Truth?, ed. Kuipers, T. A. F., Amsterdam, 1987Google Scholar.

29 Rawls, pp. 8 f.

30 For a discussion, see Burg, Wibren van der, ‘The Importance of Ideals’, Journal of Value Inquiry, xxxi (1997)Google Scholar.

31 I would like to thank Charlotte Beauchamp, Wibren van der Burg, Robert E. Goodin, Bo Pettersson, Mikko Wennberg and the editor of Utilitas and a referee for helpful discussion and written comments on an earlier version of this article, and I am grateful to the European University Institute (TMR Programme) for giving me financial support during my stay in Florence where this article was written.