Andrea Villani

Undoubtedly, the XXth century’s great ideological models have gone into crisis, at least in the sense that today it is challenging for them to be fully taken by some government and as a polar reference by large political forces on a world scale. Today we are confronted with globalist ideologies and practices and communitarian tensions...

The Economist, in the time of its 175th birthday, has drawn up and submitted a ‘‘Manifesto for Renewing Liberalism for the XXIst Century’’. Here is carried out an analysis of the main goals of this Manifesto, that is the emphasis on the importance of the idea of liberty as a guideline for life, action and development of every individual and of every community...

One of the most important debates in today’s economic policy is between Neo-Liberals supporters of free market and Neo-Keynesians supporting the fundamental relevance of public action. In this paper the James M. Buchanan’s role among the masters of neo-liberal politics is underlined. In his approach, market and political process founded on the exchange are considered good in themselves, and at the basis of the rationality of choice not only for the individual behaviour but also for public choices is set the individual, in a contractarian-constitutionalist perspective. Particularly Buchanan’s contributions in the economics of politics, and his role in the debate about justice are analysed and discussed here.

This paper considers and analyses theses about justice supported by Michael Sandel. The crucial problem concerns the connection between the definition of good for every individual and for a society, and if this good must be defined and pursued freely, or if it can be established by other persons. The question is open and Sandel supports that not necessarily a society where exists the widest degree of freedom is also a good society. In such a situation Sandel supports the idea that in any case the possible choice for individual and society should be discussed in terms of reason, and yet maintaining the maximum freedom in the society. He emphasizes the need of a civic engagement by those who support the importance of moral values as identified according to the Communitarian tradition, and according what is thought as a personal and civic virtue to be practised.

ABSTRACT: In this paper is analysed the volume of Amartya Sen The Idea of Justice. Here are considered and discussed the methodological foundations and the goals proposed by Sen, establishing a conception of justice that must actually emerge in a society through the public debate, and the implications above all terms of reduction of the most resounding injustices, still existing in many societies. In this analysis one gives evidence to the conceptual ancestors probably in contradiction in the Utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, and some theoretical diffi culties that seem emerge in the Senian elaboration. KEY WORDS: justice, criteria of rationality in individual and social choice, utopia, democracy. SOMMARIO: 1. The Idea of Justice come punto fermo della ricerca di Amartya Sen sul tema della giustizia nei termini più generali. – 2. La questione di cosa sia da considerare giusto e cosa ingiusto. – 3. Da dove viene l’idea di giustizia?. – 4. Il tema delle concezioni di giustizia sul tappeto dal 1971, dopo A Theory of Justice di John Rawls. – 5. Se sia defi nibile come giusto qualsiasi modo di procedere che consenta di raggiungere esiti buoni. – 6. Come riteniamo di poter affermare che ognuno, sia nelle scelte individuali che nella partecipazione alle scelte collettive, tenda a realizzare ciò che ritiene più positivo dal proprio punto di vista. – 7. L’idea di Sen, per un giudizio di valore di fondo, che aiutare chi si trovi in diffi coltà sia con azioni individuali che collettive sia buono, civile, meritorio, e quindi giusto. – 8. Il fondamento del «capability approach». – 9. La questione della libertà nelle decisioni. – 10. Se il bene che una persona sceglie sia giudicabile con adeguato fondamento fuori di lei. – 11. La concezione di Jeremy Bentham, che ritiene che soltanto il singolo, concreto individuo sia abilitato a giudicare in ogni scelta che cosa sia il bene per lui. – 12. La visione di John Stuart Mill nella concezione del bene. – 13. Come di fatto Sen assuma come fondativi per la propria idea di giustizia, in particolare giustizia distributiva, sia principi propri dell’elaborazione di Bentham, sia criteri milliani. – 14. La tesi, da assumere come un assioma, che ogni persona in ogni momento sceglie ciò che ritiene per lei più positivo, o meno negativo. – 15. Nesso tra scelta individuale e collettiva e necessità di tener conto delle conseguenze nell’approccio utilitaristico. – 16. Il dilemma tra la posizione di Krishna e quella di Arjuna.

ABSTRACT Recently an old debate amongst scholars of economics and of other social sciences has been revived: that between supporters of the free market and supporters of public regulation of economic activity, the aims being specifically that of efficiency according to the former group, and development, stability and social justice for the latter. In this paper we consider Carlo Beretta’s analysis, which by means of a historical and theoretical method, gives evidence of the limits of the neoclassical approach, and emphasizes the importance of social rules and agreements, i.e. the need for the intervention of collective institutions in order to reach the fundamental goals of social and economic policy. KEYWORDS: Market, development, public institutions. JEL Classification: B290, B410.

We describe and explain some of the goals Keynes establishes for the government. The lines Keynes suggested for reaching a situation of full employment are only one part of the story. For Keynes, in a vision which we define «ideal utilitarianism», it is important to reach not only a situation of full employment, but also «the city of the wonders». He thinks that it is possible and rational for educated and intelligent human beings to live a «good life» where one enjoys true goods, at personal and social level. Keynes thinks it is possible to identify these goals rationally, and to achieve them through expertly informed state intervention.

In the mid Sixties, there has been a strong debate about the governance of the urban development of Milan and its metropolitan area. Two alternative models proposed put forward contrasting views. On one side, those who supported the opportunity of a planning based on great transport infrastructures, to predetermine the outcome of the urban development. On the opposite side, those who thought that such a goal was neither correct nor politically attainable, and stressed instead the importance of process planning. The debate did neither consider the consequences of the implementation, nor the problems involved in the management of each model. This debate anticipated an analogous one both at theoretical and political level in the field of urban planners in the Western world.