The conference will take place in Philadelphia, PA, on January 3-5, 2014. The submission deadline is April 30, 2013.

Social economics has long emphasized the inherent social nature of the economy, stressing that the ties that bind people together in the economy have essential effects on economic outcomes (and vice versa). Law is also a social institution that regulates and influences how people relate to each other, including its effects on economic transactions and other related social interactions. In other words, law should be an integral part of social economics, and this conference theme hopes to enhance and highlight this.

In terms of economics, law is best established within the mainstream traditions of law-and-economics. But there is a need for this paradigm, based almost solely on neoclassical economic principles, to be supplanted by a social economics outlook. There are already efforts on the part of legal scholars to question neoclassical law-and-economics (such as the law and socio-economic movement and behavioral law-and-economics) as well as areas stressing the social aspects of law (such as law-and-society). Social economics has an tremendous opportunity to contribute to this reorientation of economic thinking within the law.

For the ASE sessions at the 2014 ASSA meetings we welcome proposals for papers on all aspects of social economics, especially those dealing with the law. Possible law-related topics include:

1. In what ways can social economics offer an improved economic analysis of law?
2. How have social economics addressed legal issues in the past, either directly or indirectly?
3. How can social economists incorporate legal concepts into their work? Many substantive topics of interest to social economists, such as inequality, poverty, and discrimination have important  legal components that affect social-economic outcomes.
4. What general topics in legal studies could benefit from a social economics approach? Such as:
5. Contract law (based on promise, consent, efficiency, etc.)
6. Property (individual versus collective orientation, issues of taxation, etc.)
7. Criminal punishment (justified by deterrence, retributivism, rehabilitation, etc.)
8. Judicial decision-making (based on rights, efficiency, social justice, etc.)

To submit a paper or a session, please go to the proposal submission area of the ASE website (under Conferences > ASSA > Proposal submissions). Submission deadline is April 30, 2013.

Individuals whose papers are accepted for presentation must either be or become members of the Association for Social Economics by July 1, 2013, in order for the paper to be included in the program. Membership information can be found at socialeconomics.org.

All papers presented at the ASSA meetings are eligible for the Warren Samuels Prize, awarded to the best paper that advances the goals of social economics and has widespread appeal. Papers can also be considered for a special issue of the Forum for Social Economics. Details of these opportunities will be sent to authors of accepted papers.

ASE Special Session on Welfare Economics: How To Revive It?

Special session at the 2013 ASSA meetings (Philadelphia, Jan 2014), and possible special issue for the Review of Social Economy

Already in 1952 Boulding  raised several critical points concerning the overall conceptual structure of welfare economics as well as its micro-foundations such as:

1. the assumption of maximization of given and stable goals (preferences, profits),
2. the assumption of continuous welfare functions,
3. the emphasis on exchange to attain welfare improvements ignoring the analysis of conflicts,
4. the emphasis on perfect competition not allowing for economies of scale and omitting the analysis of market failures such as public goods.

However, the greatest problem according to Boulding, may be the separation of welfare theory from ethics. He also pointed to the exceedingly conservative nature of welfare economics.

Despite the misgivings that many economist have about welfare economics, this literature is mostly stale since the 1940s. After publications by Pareto, Samuelson, Hicks and Robbins the economics community settled on a somewhat narrow perspective: Pareto optimality and separation of efficiency from justice. The argument of second best then makes welfare economics conservative and suggests (government) intervention hurts per se. The purpose of this session, possibly to be developed into a special issue for the Review of Social Economy (subject to peer review), is to help to revive the stale field of welfare economics - to make it more fruitful for policy analysis as well. Such a move is long overdue.

In recent years, the literature evolving around happiness research (Frey & Stutzer 2008; Layard 2005), justice and economics (Hausman and McPherson 2006, Sen 2009 and Sandel 2012) and alternative welfare indicators (Stiglitz et al. 2009) seem to suggest a possible renaissance and transformation of welfare economics. These are among the inputs for a discussion of welfare economics that could lead to new and now more helpful practical and policy oriented insights. Can welfare economics move away from its problematic assumptions? What are better or complementary welfare indicators to GDP? How are and can they be constructed and developed? What is the relevance of the thriving happiness research for developing welfare indicators? What do other social sciences contribute to the area, and how? What is the role of the state and the market when trying to enhance wellbeing?

Contributions from all kinds of angles and schools of thought are welcome.

Submit a one-page proposal for a paper as word attachment to an email to Stefan Kesting ([email protected]) and Wilfred Dolfsma ([email protected]) by March 31, 2013.