SSCW

Charles Blackorby

Admin — 2026-10-22T18:12:11Z

Charles Blackorby, known as Chuck, grew up in Pembina, ND, a small town on the Canadian border. After obtaining a B.A. from Harvard in 1963, he completed his Ph.D. at Johns Hopkins in 1967. Kelvin Lancaster was his thesis supervisor. Chuck had academic appointments at the University of California, Santa Barbara (1967–1970), the London School of Economics (1970–1972), Southern Illinois University, Carbondale (1972–1975), the University of British Columbia (1974–2002), and the University of Warwick (2002–2010). He was an Associate Member of GREQAM in Marseille since 1989 and a CIREQ Associate Research Fellow in Montreal since 2001. Upon retirement, he and his wife, the economist Margaret Slade, returned to live in Vancouver.

Chuck received numerous awards and distinctions. He was a Fellow of the Econometric Society, a Fellow of the Canadian Economics Association, a Killam Prize Laureate, and the recipient of the Jacob Bieley Award from the University of British Columba. He served as President of the Canadian Economics Association in 2000–2001. Chuck delivered the Innis Lecture at the CEA's annual meeting in 1990 and the Arrow Lecture at the meeting of the Society for Social Choice and Welfare in 2004.

Chuck published over 100 articles in journals and edited volumes, two monographs, and one co-edited volume. His journal articles most frequently appeared in Econometrica, the Journal of Economic Theory, the Review of Economic Studies, the Journal of Public Economics, Social Choice and Welfare, the International Economic Review, and the Canadian Journal of Economics.

Chuck enjoyed working with colleagues, with the consequence that he had a rather large number of co-authors. Particularly long-lasting collaborations were those with Bob Russell and Dan Primont, who he met while teaching in Santa Barbara, and with David Donaldson and Walter Bossert that began during his time at U.B.C. Donaldson was his most frequent co-author. Bill Schworm and John Weymark also wrote a number of articles with him.

Terence Gorman was an important early influence on Chuck's research. He and Tony Shorrocks co-edited The Collected Works of W. M. Gorman: Volume I (Oxford University Press, 1995). This collection includes editorial commentaries on the papers, a number of which had not previously been published.

Chuck was a microeconomic theorist. His early research focused on duality, separability, aggregation, functional structure, and dynamic consistency, topics that he on occasion later returned to. Chuck had a passionate interest in ethical issues, which is reflected in the fact that most of his publications after his arrival at U.B.C. were devoted to normative economics. In particular, he made major contributions to social choice theory, welfare economics, the measurement of inequality and poverty, the theoretical foundations and practical implementation of interpersonal comparisons of well-being, and population ethics. His work on welfare economics was wide ranging, addressing issues related to intergenerational equity, cost-benefit analysis, risk-benefit analysis, rational choice, and optimal tax and expenditure theory. On occasion, Chuck's research took him further afield, with contributions to topics ranging from general and partial equilibrium theory to international economics.

Soon after completing his Ph.D., Chuck became well-known for his fundamental contributions showing how duality theory can be employed to determine the functional structure implications of alternative separability assumptions, particularly in the context of consumer theory and producer theory. Much of this research was conducted with Primont and Russell and summarized in their joint book, Duality, Separability, and Functional Structure: Theory and Economic Applications (North–Holland, 1978). This volume is the authoritative monograph on this subject and is a must-read for anyone who contemplates working on these issues. Later, he built on this research in a series of articles with Schworm, including three that deal with aggregate measures of capital. This early research on separability and functional structure subsequently played an important role in Chuck's work on social choice and welfare economics.

Chuck's 1984 Journal of Public Economics article, "Social Criteria for Evaluating Population Change," written with Donaldson initiated the burgeoning subfield of formal population ethics. In this literature, the tools of social choice and welfare economics are used (i) to identify criteria for socially evaluating alternatives that involve variable population sizes and (ii) to apply these criteria to concrete problems in which the actions taken affect the number of people or sentient beings who exist. The 1984 article is notable for the introduction of a novel utilitarian class of variable-population social-evaluation criteria –-critical-level utilitarianism––that avoids some flaws inherent in average and total utilitarianism. This class has been extensively studied in the subsequent literature. Beginning in the early 1990s, Blackorby and Donaldson joined forces with Bossert to write a series of papers on formal population ethics. Most of their work on this topic has been synthesized in Population Issues in Social Choice Theory, Welfare Economics, and Ethics (Cambridge University Press, 2005). This volume is known for its innovative contributions to the field, its rigor, and its philosophical sophistication. This monograph, and many of Chuck's other writings on normative issues, have received a great deal of attention from philosophers, not just from economists.

Full justice cannot be done to Chuck's wide-ranging scholarly accomplishments here, so only brief mention is made of three other topics to which he has made significant contributions. With Donaldson, he wrote a number of important articles on the normative approach to inequality and poverty measurement. The first of them, "Measures of Relative Equality and Their Meaning in Terms of Social Welfare" (Journal of Economic Theory, 1978), opened up new paths of investigation that were, by and large, neglected until the time it appeared.

Chuck also wrote a number of highly cited papers on social choice theory when it is assumed that some form of interpersonal utility comparison is possible. His article with Donaldson and Weymark, "Social Choice with Interpersonal Utility Comparisons: A Diagrammatic Introduction" (International Economic Review, 1984), has been used in textbooks to introduce this subject.

In his article with Schworm and Tony Venables, "Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Factor Price Equalization" (Review of Economic Studies, 1993), a long-standing issue in the international trade literature was finally resolved. While most previous publications on this topic confine themselves to the formulation of sufficient conditions for factor price equalization, this article provides a clear-cut answer to the question how far the search for progressively weaker sufficient conditions can go by providing sufficient conditions that are also necessary

Chuck played a major role in turning the U.B.C. Economics Department into one of the top 20 departments in the world. His unconditional support and encouragement to countless junior members of our community, whether or not they were his own colleagues or students, deserves recognition. With his sonorous voice and outgoing personality, Chuck had a commanding presence. Those that knew him well have had the pleasure and privilege of benefiting from his immense generosity and, most importantly, from his invaluable friendship.

Walter Bossert (Université de Montréal), John A. Weymark (Vanderbilt University)

David Donaldson

Admin — 2026-10-22T17:16:32Z

David Donaldson was born in Peterborough, Ontario on July 5, 1938 and passed away on
June 9, 2026 in Vancouver, just shy of his 88th birthday.

David Donaldson was born in Peterborough, Ontario on July 5, 1938 and passed away on June 9, 2026 in Vancouver, just shy of his 88th birthday.

David received a B.A. in Mathematics from the University of Toronto in 1960 and graduated from Stanford University with a Ph.D. in Economics in 1966. He spent his entire career at the University of British Columbia's Department of Economics, which he joined in 1964 and where he stayed until his retirement in 1998.

David's remarkable research accomplishments were recognized in 1995 with the Isaac Walton Killam Senior award. Starting in 2001, David was a CIREQ Associate Research Fellow at the Université de Montréal. He was invited to deliver the Arrow Lecture at the 2008 Meeting of the Society for Social Choice and Welfare.

David was the recipient of U.B.C. teaching awards in 1992 and 1996 in recognition of his outstanding teaching. He was well-loved by his students and served as a role model for generations of Ph.D. students. David was renowned for speaking about "these little guys" whiletwisting the curls in his hair when illustrating economic principles. On four occasions, David taught in U.B.C.'s Arts I programme, which is an interdisciplinary great books course for first- year undergraduates. One of his students in Arts I was his future co-author John Weymark, who credits David for his decision to become an economist and his interest in social choice theory. Another co-author, Krishna Pendakur, was also inspired to be an economist after having had
David as an undergraduate teacher.

David is best known for his research on social choice theory, welfare economics, normative measures of inequality and poverty, and population ethics. He wrote over 100 articles and co-authored one monograph. That the U.B.C. Economics Department was among the world leaders in social choice theory (and normative economics in general) for quite some time can, to a large extent, be attributed to his outstanding research contributions.

David's publications reflect his life-long passion for justice, equity, and the social good, and the normative arguments that support their achievement. Having had Ken Arrow as a teacher and thesis supervisor at Stanford helped direct him towards social choice theory and welfare economics as the subjects that would be the focus of his research. Amartya Sen's Collective Choice and Social Welfare (Holden–Day, 1970) and John Rawls' "Justice as Fairness" (Journal of Philosophy, 1957) and A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press, 1971) cemented this interest.

It is impossible in a few paragraphs to do full justice to the breadth and depth of David's research accomplishments. Below are selective remarks on what can be considered as being some of his most impactful publications.

David first gained an international reputation for his work with Charles Blackorby on normatively significant measures of inequality and poverty. Their ''Measures of Relative Equality and Their Meaning in Terms of Social Welfare" (Journal of Economic Theory, 1978), ''A Theoretical Treatment of Absolute Indices of Inequality'' (International Economic Review, 1980), and "Ethical Indices for the Measurement of Poverty" (Econometrica, 1980) have been particularly influential. ''A Single-Parameter Generalization of the Gini Indices of Inequality'' (Journal of Economic Theory, 1980), written with Weymark, introduced and axiomatically characterized a one-parameter class of inequality indices that include the Gini index as a special case. The parameter captures the degree to which inequality aversion is taken into account. This class of indices has been employed in many empirical studies of inequality.

Beginning with "Utility vs. Equity: Some Plausible Quasi-Orderings" (Journal of Public Economics, 1977), written with Blackorby, David published a number of important articles about collective decision-making when interpersonal comparisons of well-being are included in the toolbox that is at the disposal of a public decision maker. In collaboration with Blackorby and Weymark, in ''Social Choice with Interpersonal Utility Comparisons: A Diagrammatic Introduction'' (International Economic Review, 1984), David developed a diagrammatic representation of the possibilities that emerge in social choice problems when various forms of interpersonal comparisons of well-being are possible. This article serves as the basis of a number of textbook treatments of this problem.

David's path-breaking article with Blackorby, ''Social Criteria for Evaluating Population Change'' (Journal of Public Economics, 1984), introduced a novel form of utilitarianism––critical-level level utilitarianism. Critical-level utilitarianism recommends against bringing individuals into existence if their lifetime well-beings are expected to be below a threshold that represents a minimally acceptable quality of life––the critical level. This article provided the foundation for an extensive body of research on population ethics that remains active to the present time. It also served as the starting point of a long-term project on population ethics (with Blackorby and later also with Walter Bossert) that culminated in their monograph, Population Issues in Social Choice Theory, Welfare Economics, and Ethics (Cambridge University Press,2005). David was a committed utilitarian, and his 2002 survey article ''Utilitarianism and the Theory of Justice'' with Blackorby and Bossert in the Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Volume 1 (North-Holland) is a widely consulted reference.

Less well known are David's forays into the ethics of animal exploitation. David was once selected to serve as a representative on U.B.C.'s animal care committee. The remit of this committee was to ensure that the treatment of animals used in research conforms to appropriate ethical principles. One of the issues the committee confronted focused on the following question: If harmful experimental treatments are to be administered more than once, should the same laboratory animals be used repeatedly, or is it ethically preferable to use different animals in each instance? Because these animals are brought into existence solely for the purpose of being used in research, this is a genuine variable-population issue. Together with Blackorby (who served on the same committee at a different time), David came up with a clear answer: If the harm done by each experiment is sufficiently large (which was, by all reasonable measures, the case at the time), it is preferable that the same animals be used repeatedly. This is a consequence of using the critical-level utilitarian criterion that they had developed. A somewhat similar analysis can be applied to animals that are used for human food consumption. In addition to providing recommendations that were well-received within the context of their committee responsibilities, the two of them published their findings in an important article, ''Pigs and Guinea Pigs: A Note on the Ethics of Animal Exploitation'' (Economic Journal, 1992). These contributions to animal ethics are a good example of the practical relevance of much of David's work.

David had an enormous and lasting impact on his colleagues, students, co-authors, and the wider community of scholars interested in social choice theory and welfare economics. From the beginning of his career, David's interests went well beyond the traditional confines of economics. Much of his work was of significant relevance for political and moral philosophers (including both theoretical and applied ethicists). The members of these communities enthusiastically welcomed him in their midst. A commitment to social justice was an important part of David's life. His student days at Stanford coincided with the heyday of the civil rights movement, which David strongly endorsed. He was also an active supporter of the peace movement and participated in the Vancouver peace walk for as long as his health permitted him to do so. He also joined numerous initiatives and events to combat climate change. His compassionate positions on social issues were guided by the strong and highly compelling ethical principles he adhered to.

Music was a great passion throughout David's life. He started playing the piano, the organ, and several brass instruments in his childhood. Later, he developed an interest in folk music and added the guitar to his repertoire. After the onset of rheumatism in the early 1980s, David was no longer able to play most of these instruments, so he instead focused on wind instruments––the recorder and various types of whistles in particular. In addition to playing privately and performing in public both as an instrumentalist and in a church choir, David enjoyed composing music. He issued two CDs that he recorded, edited, and mastered himself before having them reproduced.

David was an amazing human being who was renowned for his kindness and compassion. He was also the best friend one could wish for. David will be missed by his loved ones, his friends, and a multitude of members of the academic community. The world became a better place because we were fortunate to have him with us for almost nine decades.

Walter Bossert (Université de Montréal), John A. Weymark (Vanderbilt University)

Kotaro Suzumura

Admin — 2023-12-11T10:54:15Z

Kotaro Suzumura (January 7, 1944 – January 15, 2020) was an exceptional person in a league of his own. His contributions to economics in general and to social-choice theory and welfare economics in particular were path-breaking and unparalleled. In addition to his own research, Kotaro single-handedly created an entire community of excellent scholars who are dedicated to normative economics and the theory of collective decision-making. Japan is now a powerhouse in our field—an achievement that would not have been thinkable without him.

I trust that everyone reading this piece is familiar with Kotaro's superb academic record and I will therefore refrain from providing an account of his stellar accomplishments. Please allow me to instead indulge in some personal reminiscences, in the hope that I will at least partly succeed inconveying what an extraordinary and gentle human being Kotaro was.

I enjoyed several brief encounters with Kotaro at various conferences during the late 1980s and early 1990s but it was not until the late 1990s that I had the opportunity to discuss research of mutual interest with him in person. I had a position at the University of Nottingham at the time and Kotaro was visiting our department, primarily to work with his coauthor Yongsheng Xu. In the course of our exchanges, it became clear that Kotaro and I had been thinking about the same research questions for some time, and it was only natural that we decided to combine our efforts. Along with my colleague Yves Sprumont (whom we had the good fortune of counting as a collaborator on several joint projects), I visited him at Hitotsubashi University for the first time in 2000. This sparked our collaboration which flourished and continued until the very end.

It was a pleasure and a privilege to have Kotaro as my sensei, as my coauthor and, above all, as my dear friend for more than two decades. He was my guide and my companion during numerous visits to Japan. I don't have the words to adequately describe how much I learned from him, both as a social-choice theorist and, more importantly, as a person. I will never forget the hours we spent discussing everything under the sun, sharing meals, exchanging reading recommendations, or watching baseball together.

Kotaro introduced me to genuine Japanese cuisine and, over the years, we kept going back to the same restaurants. We had our favorite tempura place, our regular sushi restaurant, and what must have been one of the best soba establishments in Tokyo. Kotaro taught me how to order bıru in nihongo and, after satisfying himself that I had reached the requisite proficiency, permitted me to graduate to nama bıru before, at long last, reaching thepinnacle of nama dai. Moreover, I owe my first fugu experience to him. And I greatly enjoyed Kotaro's anecdote that he once had the dubious honor of being the first customer (or shall I say guinea pig?) of a friend of his who had just obtained his license as a fugu chef; apparently the ink on the document was barely dry by the time he demonstrated his skills in narrowly avoiding the potentially lethal poison sac that is characteristic of the sea dweller in question.

At some point we discovered that we shared a fondness of crime and mystery novels. One evening at a French restaurant in Montreal, we started talking about books that we had read and enjoyed, and trading suggestions for authors became a regular fixture during our increasingly enjoyable mutual visits.

On at least one occasion, Kotaro visited me while the World Series was in progress and we managed to catch an unforgettable match that went into extra innings. Spending these four hours in front of my TV with him was a sheer joy; his excitement and his delight were nothing short of infectious. Kotaro was a walking baseball encyclopedia. He literally knew everything about the game that was worth knowing—and his expertise covered both the Major League and the Nippon Professional varieties.

Kotaro was in Montreal when the earthquake and tsunami hit on March 11, 2011. Confronted with this tragic event, his great compassion came to the fore. He showed boundless concern for his loved ones and all those affected. His dedication to do, even from afar, everything in his power to help in any way possible was truly remarkable and filled me with deep admiration.

One of Kotaro's many outstanding contributions that I appreciate the most is his “Remarks on the Theory of Collective Choice,” published by Economica in 1976. Although I promised earlier to control my urges to discuss his research in detail, I feel compelled to mention this particular article because it is indicative of what I think of as his exceptional personal qualities. Evidently, the title of this piece couldn't be any more modest. And yet, the paper contains some deep and original results that are of profound importance not only in our field but also in mathematics. In addition to providing a substantial generalization of Edward Szpilrajn's celebrated extension theorem, this is where Kotaro introduces his path-breaking notion of consistency. After many years of exploring this ingenious weakening of transitivity and its possible ramifications, I came to the conviction that it is more natural and fundamental than transitivity itself; as I see it, all transitivity has to say for itself is that it is equivalent to Suzumura consistency in the presence of reflexivity and completeness. But I digress; the point I want to make is that it says so much about Kotaro that he chose such a humble label for this work of beauty. To me, it is an attribute of great wisdom to be aware of how little it really is that we know—and to express genuine humility in the face of this realization.

As we all know, social-choice theory is not exactly the most popular subject these days (to put it mildly). Even an intellectual giant of Kotaro's stature had to suffer more and more from having his work desk-rejected solely on the basis of his choice of research topic. He never let the—at times quite hostile—responses of this kind bring him down and persevered with great determination and an unshakable belief in the importance of our field.

I am sure he would want us to follow in his footsteps and resist this unfortunate bias that seems to be creeping into the editorial offices of an expanding set of journals. Perhaps one of the best ways of honoring his memory is to make sure that we do not allow ourselves to get discouraged and continue to do—and proudly promote—the research that we are so fond of.

Kotaro had a profound and lasting impact on my life. His tremendous courage and his genuine desire to make this world a better place was a true inspiration and permeated all his endeavors, be they of a professional or a personal nature. I am a better human being because of him and I am sure that he had the same effect on countless others.

In these dark hours dominated by grief, I find solace in Kotaro's leaving us with the legacy of his example. Kotaro was a truly great and graceful person with a big heart and unsurpassed generosity and kindness. He will be sorely missed but my fond memories of him will live on forever in my heart.

Farewell, my dear friend, and rest in peace.

Walter Bossert