302. Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell, Notions of Fairness versus the Pareto Principle: On the Role of Logical Consistency, 11/2000; subsequently published in The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 110, No. 2, November 2000, 237-249.
Abstract: Most legal academics and policymakers believe that weight should be accorded to conceptions of fairness in evaluating legal policies. In other writings, we have demonstrated that adherence to any notion of fairness will sometimes lead to a conflict with the Pareto principle. That is, to endorse a notion of fairness is to endorse the view that it can be desirable to adopt a legal rule that will reduce the well-being of every person in society. In this comment, we will be arguing that Howard Chang's position in his reply to one of our articles, in which he suggests that it is possible to imagine some notions of fairness under which this conflict does not exist, is tantamount to an abandonment of logical consistency in normative assessment of policy.