Certain behaviors in markets are unambiguously unethical. In other cases, however, voluntary exchanges that can create gains from trade remain contested on moral grounds, because of what is traded or of the price at which the exchange occurs. This chapter offers a framework to analyze these contested markets and provides examples of two general instances. First, we examine “repugnant” transactions involving the human body—such as compensated organ donation and gestational surrogacy—where concerns about dignity, exploitation, and inequality conflict with welfare gains from expanding supply. Second, we study price gouging in emergencies, where demands for a “just price” clash with the incentive and allocation roles of price adjustments under scarcity. Across both cases, we synthesize evidence on societal attitudes and highlight how support for policy options depends on perceived trade-offs between autonomy, fairness and efficiency, and on institutional features that can separate compensation from allocation.
Elias, J., Lacetera, N., Macis, M. (2026). The morality of market exchanges: between societal values and trade-offs. Cheltenham : Edward Elgar.
The morality of market exchanges: between societal values and trade-offs
Lacetera, Nicola;Macis, Mario
2026
Abstract
Certain behaviors in markets are unambiguously unethical. In other cases, however, voluntary exchanges that can create gains from trade remain contested on moral grounds, because of what is traded or of the price at which the exchange occurs. This chapter offers a framework to analyze these contested markets and provides examples of two general instances. First, we examine “repugnant” transactions involving the human body—such as compensated organ donation and gestational surrogacy—where concerns about dignity, exploitation, and inequality conflict with welfare gains from expanding supply. Second, we study price gouging in emergencies, where demands for a “just price” clash with the incentive and allocation roles of price adjustments under scarcity. Across both cases, we synthesize evidence on societal attitudes and highlight how support for policy options depends on perceived trade-offs between autonomy, fairness and efficiency, and on institutional features that can separate compensation from allocation.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
proof correct_handbook.pdf
embargo fino al 28/03/2027
Tipo:
Postprint / Author's Accepted Manuscript (AAM) - versione accettata per la pubblicazione dopo la peer-review
Licenza:
Licenza per accesso libero gratuito
Dimensione
339.61 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
339.61 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Contatta l'autore |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.



