Browse by subject:
Applied and bridge studies study record
Environment, climate & resourcesPricing Harm and Distributive Justice: A Response to the Commodification Objection
STATUS · Manuscript in progressSSRN · Not yet posted
MECHANISM
Identify the incentive structure and the condition that would falsify the claim.
RULE CHANGE
Read the intervention only after the paper shows how the current payoff space fails to support system welfare.
READER USE
Use the summary to see where private gain creates system exposure, then check the study record.
Reading βW
βW means annual system-welfare loss divided by annual industry revenue Π. Revenue is the denominator, never profit, earnings, or net income; ΔW and Π must use the same domain, same time period, and same activity boundary. See the βW methodology manual.
Contribution — what this adds to the conversation
The commodification objection is valid only when pricing sells the protected interest itself. Under five axioms, harm pricing charges the activity, not the person or commons. βW = ΔW/Π measures external welfare destruction relative to revenue. Refusal to price harm can preserve the Missing System Theory.
WHAT'S NEW · The commodification objection is valid only when pricing sells the protected interest itself. Under five axioms, harm pricing charges the activity, not the person or commons. βW = ΔW/Π measures external welfare destruction relative to revenue. Refusal to price harm can preserve the Missing System Theory.
The paper responds to the commodification objection against welfare-based pricing. It formalizes the Commodification Objection Theorem, showing that pricing harm-generating decisions is legitimate when it satisfies five axioms: protected-interest separation, externality targeting, non-discharge, distributive return, and anti-capture accounting. Applications to occupational safety, carbon pricing, and firearms demonstrate that the objection fails under these conditions.