 | This article has multiple issues. Please helpimprove it or discuss these issues on thetalk page.(Learn how and when to remove these messages) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
|
Economic ethics is the combination ofeconomics andethics, incorporating both disciplines to predict, analyze, and model economic phenomena.
It can be summarized as the theoretical ethical prerequisites and foundations of economic systems. This principle can be traced back to the Greek philosopherAristotle, whoseNicomachean Ethics describes the connection between objective economic principles and justice.[1] The academic literature on economic ethics is extensive, citingnatural law andreligious law as influences on the rules of economics.[2] The consideration of moral philosophy or amoral economy differs from behavioral economic models.[3] The standard creation, application and beneficiaries of economic models present atrilemma when ethics are considered.[4] These ideas, in conjunction with the assumption of rationality in economics, create a link between economics and ethics.
| Part of a series on |
| Philosophy |
|---|
 |
 | This sectionhas an unclearcitation style. The references used may be made clearer with a different or consistent style ofcitation andfootnoting.(July 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Ancient Indian economic thought revolved around the interplay between happiness, ethics, and economic values, recognizing their collective role in shaping human existence.[1] The core principles of theUpanishads—transcendental unity, oneness and stability— stem from this philosophical relationship.[2] Ancient Indian philosophy also demonstrates an early understanding of several modern economic concepts, such as regulating demand when it exceeded supply to prevent societal disorder. This was achieved by emphasizing that true happiness stemmed from non-material wealth, mirroring Alfred Marshall's principle of the insatiability of wants.[1]
The Rig Veda acknowledges economic inequality in Chapter 10, stating: "The riches of the liberal never waste away, while he who will not give finds no comfort in them". This suggests that wealth accumulation was not inherently immoral, but hoarding it was considered a sin.[1] Similarly,Arthashastra established laws promoting economic efficiency within an ethical framework. Its author, Kautilya, argued that infrastructure development—primarily the responsibility of the king—was a key driver of economic growth, provided it was carried out in a morally sound manner.
Ancient Greek philosophers intricately linked economic teachings with ethical systems.Socrates,Plato, andAristotle held that happiness (eudaimonia) was the highest good humans could pursue.
This perspective presented challenges in reconciling ethics with economics, particularly regarding the role of pleasure in achieving happiness.
Callicles, a character in Plato's "Gorgias," argued that living rightly involves gratifying all desires through courage and practicality, advocating for the unrestrained satisfaction of one's appetites.
This stance posed challenges to the concepts of scarcity and consumption regulation. The division of labor emerged as a solution, where individuals focused on their most productive functions to efficiently meet basic human needs like food, clothing, and shelter, thereby maximizing utility.[5]
InXenophon's "Oeconomicus," inspired by Socratic ideals, the emphasis is on understanding the proper use of money and property rather than merely acquiring wealth for personal gain. This work underscores the importance of knowledge and virtue in economic activities, aligning with the notion that virtue is a form of knowledge essential for effective household management.[6]
Religion was at the core of economic life during theMiddle Ages; hence the theologians of the time used inferences from their respective ethical teachings to answer economic questions and achieve economic objectives.[7] This approach was also adopted byphilosophers during theAge of Enlightenment.[7] TheRoman Catholic Church altered its doctrinal interpretation of the validity of marriage, among other motivations, to prevent competition from threatening itsmonopolistic market position.[8]Usury or loans with high interest was seen as an ethical issue in the Church, with justice being valued aboveeconomic efficiency.[8]
The transition from anagrarian lifestyle to monetarycommerce inIsrael led to the adoption ofinterest in lending andborrowing, as it was not directly prohibited in theTorah, under the ideal "that your brother may live with you."[9]
Economic development in the Middle Ages was contingent on the ethical practices ofmerchants,[10] founded by the transformation in how medieval society understood the economics ofproperty andownership.[11]Islam supported this anti-ascetic ethic in the role of merchants, given its teaching thatsalvation derives from moderation rather than abstinence in such affairs.[12]
.png)
TheLabour Theory of Value holds that labour is the source of all economic value.[13] The distinction between "wage slaves" and "proper slaves" in this theory, with both being viewed ascommodities, is founded on the moral principle that wage slaves voluntarily offer their privately ownedlabour power to a buyer for a bargained price, while proper slaves, according toKarl Marx, have no such rights.[13]
Mercantilism, although advocated byclassical economics, is regarded as ethically ambiguous in academic literature. Adam Smith, author of the Labour Theory of Value, noted that the national economic policy favoured the interests of producers at the expense ofconsumers since domestically producedgoods were subject to highinflation.[14] The competition between domestic households and foreignspeculators also led to an unfavourablebalance of trade, i.e. increasingcurrent account deficits on thebalance of payments.[15]
Writers and commentators of the time employed Aristotle's ethical counsel to solve this economic dilemma.[15]
The moral philosophy ofAdam Smith founded the neo-classical worldview in economics, which states that one's quest for happiness is the ultimate purpose of life and that the concept ofhomo economicus describes the fundamental behavior of the economic agent.[16][17] Such an assumption that individuals are self-interested and rational has implied the exemption of collective ethics.[16] Under rational choice and neoclassical economics' adoption ofNewtonianatomism, manyconsumer behaviours are disregarded, meaning that it often cannot explain the source of consumer preferences when not constrained by the individual.[18] The role of collective ethics in consumer preference cannot be explained by neoclassical economics.[19] This degrades the applicability of themarket demand function, a key analytical tool, to real economic phenomena as a result.[18] In principle, economists thus avoided, and continue to avoid, the assumptions of abstract economic models and the unique aspects of economic problems.[20][clarification needed]
According toJohn Maynard Keynes, the complete integration of ethics and economics is contingent on the rate ofeconomic development.[21] Economists have been able to aggregate the preferences of agents, under the assumption ofhomo economicus, via the merging ofutilitarian ethics and institutionalism.[19] Keynes departed from the atomistic view of neoclassical economics with his totalistic perspective of the global economy, given that "the whole is not equal to the sum of its parts....the assumptions of a uniform and homogeneous continuum are not satisfied."[22] This enforced the idea that an unethical socioeconomic state is apparent when the economy is underfull employment, to which Keynes proposed productive spending as a mechanism to return the economy to full employment, the state where an ethically rational society exists.[19]
Philosophers in the Hellenistic tradition became a driving force to theGnostic vision, the redemption of the spirit throughasceticism that founded the debate regarding evil and ignorance in policy discussions.[1] The amalgamation of ancient Greek philosophy,logos, and early Christian philosophy in the2nd and3rd centuries AD caused believers of the time to stray from moral principles. This led to the solution that they were to act in one's best interest, given appropriate reason, to prevent ignorance.[1][clarification needed]
TheOld Testament of theBible served as the source of ethics in ancient economic practices.Currency debasement was prohibited given its fraudulent nature and negative economic consequences, which were punished according to Ezekiel 22:18–22, Isaiah 1:25, and Proverbs 25:4–5.[23] Relationships between economic and religious literature have been founded by theNew Testament. For example, James 1:27 states that "looking after orphans and widows in their distress and keeping oneself unspotted by the world make for pure worship without stain before our God and Father," which supports the academic argument that the goal of the economic process is to perfect one's personality.[24]
The concept of human capital valuation[25] is evident in the Talmud.[2] The idea ofopportunity cost is grounded in the "S'kbar B'telio" (literally meaning 'lost time') concept in Talmudic literature. In ancient Israel, aRabbi was not to be paid for his work, as it would imply that he was profiting from preaching and interpreting the word ofGod, but would be compensated otherwise for the work completed as a Rabbi as a means of survival, given they are not involved in any other profession.[2]
TheQur'an and theSunnah have guided Islamic economic practice for centuries. For example, the Qur'an bansribā as part of its focus on the eradication ofinterest to prevent financial institutions operating under the guidance of Islamic economics from makingmonopolistic returns.[26]Zakat is in itself a system for theredistribution of wealth. The Qur'an specifies that it is intended solely for the poor, the needy, zakat administrators, those whose hearts are to be reconciled, those in bondage, those debt-ridden, those who strive for the cause of God, and the wayfarer.[27] The use of Pension Loan Schemes (PLS) and other micro-finance schemes are exercised in this teaching through the inclusion of the Hodeibah micro-finance program inYemen and theUNDP Murabahah initiatives at Jabal al-Hoss inSyria.[28]
Economic ethics attempts to incorporate morality and cultural value qualities to account for the limitation of economics, which is that human decision-making is not restricted torationality.[29] This understanding of culture unites economics and ethics as a complete theory of human action.[21] Academic culture has increased interest in economic ethics as a discipline. This led to an increased awareness of the culturalexternalities of the actions ofeconomic agents, as well as limited separation between the spheres of culture, which has prompted further research into their ethical liability.[21] For example, a limitation of only portraying theinstrumental value of a piece of artwork is that it may disregard itsintrinsic value and thus should not be solely quantified.[30] Artwork can also be considered apublic good due to its intrinsic value, given its potential to contribute to national identity and educate its audience on its subject matter.[30] Intrinsic value can also be quantified as it is incrementally valuable, regardless of whether it is sacred by association and history or not.[31][32]
.png)
The development ofexperimental economics in the late 20th century created an opportunity to empirically verify the existence ofnormative ethics in economics.[33]Vernon L. Smith and his colleagues discovered numerous occurrences that may describe economic choices under theveil of ignorance.[33] Conclusions from the following economic experiments indicate that economic agents use normative ethics in making decisions while also seeking to maximise their payoffs.[34] For example, in experiments on honesty, it is predicted that lying will occur when it increases these payoffs, notwithstanding the results, which proved otherwise.[34] It is found that people also employ the "50/50 rule" to divide something regardless of the distribution of power in the decision-making process.[33]
Experimental economic studies ofaltruism have identified it as an example of rational behaviour.[33] The absence of an explanation for such behaviour indicates an antithesis in experimental economics in that it interprets morality as both an endogenous and exogenous factor, subject to the case at hand.[34] Research into the viability of normative theory as an explanation for moral reasoning is needed, with the experimental design focused on testing whether economic agents under the conditions assumed by the theory produce the same decisions as those predicted by the theory.[35] This is given that, under the veil of ignorance, agents may be "non-tuist" in the real world, as the theory suggests.[35]
Ethics inbehavioural economics is ubiquitous given its concern withhuman agency in its aim to rectify the ethical deficits found in neoclassical economics, i.e., a lack of moral dimension and lack of normative concerns.[16] The incorporation ofvirtue ethics in behavioural economics has facilitated the development of theories that attempt to describe the many anomalies that exist in how economic agents make decisions.[16] Normative concerns in economics can compensate for the applicability of behavioural economic models to real economic phenomena. Most behavioural economic models assume that preferences change endogenously, meaning that there are numerous possible decisions applicable to a given scenario, each with an ethical value.[36] Hence, there is caution in consideringwelfare as the highest ethical value in economics, as conjectured in academic literature.[36] As a result, the methodology also employs order ethics in assuming that progress in morality and economic institutions is simultaneous, given that behaviour can only be understood in an institutional framework.[16]
There are complications in applying normative inferences with empirical research in behavioural economics, as there is a fundamental difference between descriptive and prescriptive inference and propositions.[16] For example, the argument against the use ofincentives, that they force certain behaviours in individuals and convince them to ignore risk, is a descriptive proposition that is empirically unjustified.[37]
Welfare is maximized in environmental economic models when economic agents act according to thehomo economicus hypothesis.[38] This creates the possibility of economic agents compensating sustainable development for their private interests, given thathomo economicus is restricted to rationality.[38] Climate change policy as an outcome of inference fromenvironmental economics is subject to ethical considerations.[39] Theeconomics of climate change, for example, is inseparable from social ethics.[40] The idea of individuals and institutions working companionably in the public domain, as a reflection ofhomo politicus, is also an apposite ethic that can rectify this normative concern.[38] An ethical problem associated with the sub-discipline throughdiscounting is that consumers value the present more than the future, which has implications forintergenerational justice.[41] Discounting in marginal cost-benefit analysis, which economists view as a predictor for human behaviour,[41] is limited concerning future risk and uncertainty.[39] The use of monetary measures in environmental economics is based on the instrumentalisation of natural things, which is inaccurate in the case that they are intrinsically valuable.[40] Other relationships and roles between generations can be elucidated through adopting certain ethical rules. TheBrundtland Commission, for example, defines sustainable development as that which meets present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to do so,[42] which is a libertarian principle.[43][failed verification] Underlibertarianism, no redistribution of welfare is made unless all generations benefit or are unaffected.[41]
Political economy is a subject fundamentally based on normative protocol, focusing on the needs of theeconomy as a whole by analyzing the role of agents,institutions, andmarkets, as well as socially optimal behaviour.[44] Historically, morality was a notion used to discern the distribution of these roles and responsibilities, given that most economic problems derived from the failure of economic agents to fulfil them.[45] The transition of moral philosophy from such ethics toKantian ethics, as well as the emergence of market forces andcompetition law, subjected the moral-political values of themoral economy to rational judgement.[45] Economic ethics remains a substantial influence on the political economy due to its argumentative nature, evident in the literature concerning government responses to the2008 financial crisis. One proposition holds that, since the contagion of the crisis was transmitted through distinct national financial systems, future global regulatory responses should be built on thedistributive justice principle.[46] The regulation of particular cases offinancial innovation, while not considering critiques of theglobal financial system, functionally normalizes perceptions of the system's distribution of power, such that it lessens the opportunities of agents to question the morality of such practice.[46]
The relationship between ethics and economics has defined the aim ofdevelopment economics.[47] The idea that one'squality of life is determined by one's ability to lead a valuable life has founded development economics as a mechanism for expanding such capability.[47] This proposition is the basis of the conceptual relationship between it andwelfare economics as an ethical discipline, and its debate in academic literature.[47] The discourse is based on the notion that certain tools in welfare economics, particularly choice criterion, hold no value-judgement and areParetian, given that collective perspectives ofutility are not considered.[48] There are numerous ethical issues associated with the methodological approach of development economics, i.e., therandomised field experiment, many of which are morally equivocal. For example,randomisation advantages some cases and disadvantages others, which is rational under statistical assumptions and adeontological moral issue simultaneously.[49][verification needed] There are also ethical implications related to thecalculus, the nature of consent, instrumentalisation, accountability, and the role of foreign intervention in this experimental approach.[49]
Inhealth economics, the maximized level ofwell-being as an ultimate end is ethically unjustified, as opposed to the efficientallocation of resources in health that augments the average utility level.[50] Under this utility-maximizing approach, subject to libertarianism, a dichotomy is apparent between health and freedom as primary goods due to the condition that one is necessary to attain the other.[51] Any level of access, utilization, and funding ofhealthcare is ethically justified as long as it accomplishes the desired and needed level of health.[50] Health economists instrumentalise the concept of a need as one that achieves an ethically legitimate end for a person.[50] This is based on the notion that healthcare is not intrinsically valuable but morally significant because it contributes to overall well-being.[50] The methodology of analysis in health economics, with respect to clinical trials, is subject to ethical debate. The experimental design should partially be the responsibility of health economists, given their tendency to otherwise add variables that have the potential to beinsignificant.[52] This increases the risk of under-powering the study, which in health economics is primarily concerned with cost-effectiveness and has implications for evaluation.[53][52]
.svg)
Academic literature presents numerous ethical views on what constitutes a viableeconomic policy. Keynes believed that good economic policies are those that make people behave well as opposed to those that make them feel well.[1] TheVerein für socialpolitik, founded byGustav von Schmoller, insists that ethical and political considerations are critical in evaluating economic policies.[54]Rational actor theory in the policy arena is evident in the use ofPareto optimality to assess the economic efficiency of policies, as well as in the use ofcost-benefit analysis (CBA), whereincome is the basic unit of measurement.[17] The use of an iterative decision-making model, as an example of rationality, can provide a framework for economic policy in response to climate change.[55] Academic literature also presents ethical reasoning for the limitation associated with the application of rational actor theory to policy choice. Given that incomes are dependent on policy choice and vice versa, the logic of the rational model in policy choice is circular, hence the possibility of wrong policy recommendations.[17] Additionally, many factors increase one's propensity to deviate from the modelled assumptions of decision-making.[56] It is argued under the self-effacing moral theory that such mechanisms as CBA may be justified even if not explicitly moral.[17] The contrasting beliefs that public actions are based on such utilitarian reckonings and that all policy-making is politically contingent justifies the need forforecasting, which itself is an ethical dilemma.[57] This is founded on the proposition that forecasts can be amended to suit a particular action or policy rather than being objective and neutral.[57][58] For example, the code of ethics of theAmerican Institute of Certified Planners provides inadequate support for forecasters to avert this practice.[57] Such canons as those found in the Code of Professional Ethics and Practices of theAmerican Association for Public Opinion Research are limited in regulating or preventing this convention.[57]
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{citation}}: CS1 maint: work parameter with ISBN (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}:Cite journal requires|journal= (help)
