In concluding this study, a few general observations that might shed further light on the nature of our problem may be in order. We would also like to add some qualifications on the analysis presented in this work.

Many reputable welfare economists have been strenuously denying the relevance of Arrovian impossibility theorems to welfare economics. Some of them have gone as far as to purge social choice theory altogether from the sacred realm of economics. Although we are in full agreement with Arrow's response (1963, p. 108) to the effect that “one can hardly think of a less interesting question about [Arrow's] theorem than whether it falls on one side or another of an arbitrary boundary separating intellectual provinces,” the reason for which Arrow's result has been denied any legitimacy in welfare economics is worth our examination, which seems to bring about an important clarification.