The papers in this collection were selected from nearly 200 that were presented at the 50 sessions of the second annual International Conference on Socio-Economics held at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. March 1990. They reflect the great interest that socio-economics has inspired in the few years since the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics was founded in 1989. The papers represent the stimulating dialogue among psychologists, sociologists, political scientists, philosophers, economists, and students of finance and business administration. The authors are communicating across the frontiers of established disciplines to address enduring questions on economic theory and policy, and they aim to liberate the study of economics from the straitjacket of the neoclassical approach.

A groundbreaking exploration of the critical ethical issues in financial theory and practice Compiled by volume editor John Boatright, Finance Ethics consists of contributions from scholars from many different finance disciplines. It covers key issues in financial markets, financial services, financial management, and finance theory, and includes chapters on market regulation, due diligence, reputational risk, insider trading, derivative contracts, hedge funds, mutual and pension funds, insurance, socially responsible investing, microfinance, earnings management, risk management, bankruptcy, executive compensation, hostile takeovers, and boards of directors. Special attention is given to fairness in markets and the delivery of financial services, and to the duties of fiduciaries and agents Rigorous analysis of the topics covered provides essential information and practical guidance for practitioners in finance as well as for students and academics with an interest in finance ethics Ethics in Finance skillfully explains the need for ethics in the personal conduct of finance professionals and the operation of financial markets and institutions.

Schultz argues that markets are not moral-free zones, and that achieving the economic common good does indeed require morality.

Public controversies - such as those about the distribution of goods between rich and poor, trade and population policies, allocation of medical resources, and the tradeoff between environment al protection and economic efficiency - often hinge on fundamental views about how we ought to make decisions tImt affect each other, that is, what principles we ought to follow. Efforts to find an acceptable public philosophy, a set of such principles on which people might agree, have foundered because of dis agreement among philosophers and others who are concerned with such issues. One view, which I shall develop and defend here, holds that decisions that affect others should be made according to an overall evaluation of the consequences of each option. This consequentialist view is opposed by a variety of alternatives, but many of the alternatives have in COlllmon a basis in moral intuition. To take a simple example, consequentialism holds that, other things equal, if we have decided that it is better to let a terminally ill patient die than to prolong her agony by keeping her alive, then we ought to kill her.

'[T]he good man should be a lover of self.' Aristotle wrote. 'For he will both himself profit by doing noble acts, and will benefit his fellows ... '. Yet in much of contemporary moral philosophy, concern for one's own interests is considered a non-moral issue, while concern for the interests of others is paradigmatically moral. Indeed, a central issue in ethical theory involves the proper balance to be struck between prudence and morality, between the pursuit of one's own good and the pursuit of the good of others. When deliberating over what action to take, should one weigh one's own interests more heavily than those of others? Or is it possible to accommodate both self-interest and regard for others, to show that we have self-regarding reasons for helping others? The twelve essays in this volume - written from a range of perspectives - address these questions and examine related issues.

. . . Roth s book is useful and valuable. Using modern secular thought as his starting point, he reaches roughly the same conclusions that one would reach reasoning from the older Christian tradition. There is certainly much to like about that effort. Paul A. Cleveland, Markets & Morality This book is one of the best discussions of welfare economics since Murray Rothbard s classic paper of 1956 Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics . David Gordon, The Mises Review Timothy Roth shows that social welfare theory, as currently defended by welfare economists and policymakers, is based on a confused and untenable moral theory, is incompatible with a rights-based legal order and is bound to promote unjust and arbitrary redistributions. By advocating a return to the Kantian conception of the moral agent, Roth shows the way to a normative economics that harmonizes with both intuitive morality and the American legal and constitutional tradition. Roger Scruton, Writer and Philosopher, formerly University Professor and Professor of Philosophy at Boston University, US The moral imperative of individual autonomy, embodied in the Kantian Rawlsian perspective on social order, cannot be reconciled with the utilitarian presuppositions that inform normative applications of modern economics. This book exposes the contradictions that are present when the basic philosophical foundations are ignored, a stance that is, unfortunately, characteristic of much modern discourse as well as political practice. James M. Buchanan, George Mason University, US and a Nobel Laureate At a time when technical economics dominates the thinking of much of the profession, it is important to be reminded that economics has roots in moral philosophy. Certainly this book, which deftly explores the ethical prior commitments underlying economic analysis, succeeds in bringing philosophical issues to the forefront. But it does more. Roth s closely reasoned study provides a clear exposition of the Kantian Rawlsian approach to public policy, and thus is able to establish a convincing critique of orthodox welfare theory. In general, the book offers a valuable change of perspective on social questions. Eirik G. Furubotn, Texas A&M University, US Because it is technically flawed and morally bankrupt, the author argues, the economist s consequence-based, procedurally detached theory of the state has contributed to the growth of government. As part of the Kantian Rawlsian contractarian project, this book seeks to return economics to its foundations in moral philosophy. Given the moral equivalence of persons, the greatest possible equal participation must be promoted, persons must be impartially treated and, because it is grounded in consequentialist social welfare theory (SWT), the economist s theory of the state must be rejected. Ad hoc deployment of SWT has facilitated discriminatory rent seeking and contributed to larger government. In contrast, this book argues that equal political participation and a constitutional impartiality constraint minimize rent seeking, respect individual perceptions of the public good and underwrite the legitimacy of government. Economists, moral philosophers and political scientists will find this book a unique contribution to the literature.

A clear and original perspective on Kantian ethics that focuses on the dignity, vulnerability and perfectibility of human rational agency.

The connection between economics and ethics is as old as economics itself, and central to both disciplines. The essays included in the present volume provide an analysis of the connections between ethics and economics as viewed from several different - oft