Exploring the ethics of population and individual rights
Jul 2025
Enabling world-class research
Maya Eden delves into the deep, unresolved questions within normative economics. She explores the ethical considerations surrounding population, individual rights, and societal obligations, aiming to bring clarity to these complex issues through a blend of economic theory and ethical philosophy.
Pressing challenges to address
- How should we evaluate ethical trade-offs between population size and individual welfare?
- Should policymakers prioritize their constituents over global interests?
- How can individual autonomy be integrated into collective decision-making?
Unresolved challenges in normative economics
My field is normative economics, and within it, I see three major unresolved challenges. The first concerns population ethics. We are fairly adept at comparing situations involving the same group of people. For instance, we can often assess whether one distribution of income is preferable to another with a fair degree of confidence. However, we face greater uncertainty when comparing scenarios involving different numbers of lives. It remains unclear, for example, whether encouraging people to have more children would be beneficial: On one hand, if we believe that life itself holds intrinsic value, this might seem positive. On the other hand, if we argue that improving the welfare of existing people should be prioritized over increasing the number of people, the situation becomes more complex.
The second challenge revolves around individual-specific special obligations. The dominant approach in moral philosophy has typically supported universalism – the view that all individuals matter equally and, thus, their interests should be treated the same. For instance, when the Swiss government formulates policies, it ought to consider the interests of all individuals, not just those within Switzerland. However, some relationships, like those between parents and children, imply moral duties that are more particular. A parent has an obligation to care for their own children, but not to the same extent for all children in the world. The question arises whether the relationship between policymakers and their constituents creates a special duty to prioritize the interests of those constituents, and if so, to what degree.
The third challenge pertains to individual decision rights. Traditional frameworks in normative economics do not clearly differentiate between “What is the best option to choose?” and “What option should be chosen?”. This distinction is essential when considering individual autonomy. Take, for example, a person raised in a highly religious family. If that person decides to lead a secular life, their family might be deeply upset. While it might seem better, in an objective sense, for the person to stay religious, it remains the individual’s right to choose their path. This raises a long-standing issue: How do we incorporate individual decision rights into collective decisionmaking frameworks?
What is required to address these challenges
To address these challenges, we first need more people to engage with these questions. Normative economics remains a relatively small field, which slows progress. However, I am confident that, with the right tools, significant headway can be made.
Equally important is an interdiscipli nary approach. While normative economics has traditionally aligned closely with mathematical philosophy, particularly ethics, it turns out that tools developed in decision theory to study individual behavior are also highly effective in tackling these ethical dilemmas. Nevertheless, especially when addressing largescale issues, it’s crucial to broaden the scope and consider the practical tradeoffs we face – not just in theory, but in real-world contexts.
Why these questions remain unresolved
The challenges posed by these questions are considerable, but I believe the primary reason they remain unresolved is neglect. For many years, the economics profession has relied heavily on the standard utilitarian framework. While utilitarianism serves as an excellent guide for evaluating numerous policy questions, its dominance has led to inertia – a resistance to exploring alternative normative frameworks. Unfortunately, I believe that utilitarianism is ill-suited to address many of the complex policy issues we currently face. For instance, the demographic transition demands a more nuanced examination of the value of creating new lives, and whether procreative rights limit the scope of governmental interference in fertility decisions. The optimal policy response depends, in part, on how we weigh the interests of present people against those who may or may not exist in the future.
The role of the UBS Center in advancing your field
The UBS Center plays a critical role in advancing my field by supporting research on key topics and fostering an informed public debate. This helps create a dynamic intellectual environment where normative questions are brought to the forefront.
Maya Eden delves into the deep, unresolved questions within normative economics. She explores the ethical considerations surrounding population, individual rights, and societal obligations, aiming to bring clarity to these complex issues through a blend of economic theory and ethical philosophy.
Pressing challenges to address
- How should we evaluate ethical trade-offs between population size and individual welfare?
- Should policymakers prioritize their constituents over global interests?
- How can individual autonomy be integrated into collective decision-making?
Unresolved challenges in normative economics
My field is normative economics, and within it, I see three major unresolved challenges. The first concerns population ethics. We are fairly adept at comparing situations involving the same group of people. For instance, we can often assess whether one distribution of income is preferable to another with a fair degree of confidence. However, we face greater uncertainty when comparing scenarios involving different numbers of lives. It remains unclear, for example, whether encouraging people to have more children would be beneficial: On one hand, if we believe that life itself holds intrinsic value, this might seem positive. On the other hand, if we argue that improving the welfare of existing people should be prioritized over increasing the number of people, the situation becomes more complex.
The second challenge revolves around individual-specific special obligations. The dominant approach in moral philosophy has typically supported universalism – the view that all individuals matter equally and, thus, their interests should be treated the same. For instance, when the Swiss government formulates policies, it ought to consider the interests of all individuals, not just those within Switzerland. However, some relationships, like those between parents and children, imply moral duties that are more particular. A parent has an obligation to care for their own children, but not to the same extent for all children in the world. The question arises whether the relationship between policymakers and their constituents creates a special duty to prioritize the interests of those constituents, and if so, to what degree.
Maya Eden is Professor of Economics at the UZH Department of Economics, University of Zurich, and affiliated professor at the UBS Center.
Quote
I believe that utilitarianism is ill-suited to address many of the complex policy issues we currently face.
Economic challenges of our time
From rising inequality and global trade tensions to climate change and the impact of artificial intelligence on labor markets – economists today are grappling with fundamental questions that will shape our collective future. In this special edition of the Public Paper series, all affiliated professors of the UBS Center share their perspectives on these challenges. Their contributions highlight how cutting-edge research conducted at the Department of Economics at the University of Zurich can help us better understand – and potentially solve – some of the most urgent issues of our time.
It is precisely this ambition that defines the UBS Center for Economics in Society. Since its founding, the Center has served as a platform for dialogue between academia, business, and policymakers and as a catalyst for excellence in economic research. That vision goes back to Kaspar Villiger. As the founding Chairman of the Foundation Council, he played a pivotal role in establishing and shaping the UBS Center.
With this fifteenth edition of the Public Paper series, we honor Kaspar Villiger’s extraordinary contributions and legacy. By strengthening research capacity at the University of Zurich and fostering public dialogue around key societal questions, his vision continues to inspire the Center’s mission: bridging knowledge and society to build a better future.
From rising inequality and global trade tensions to climate change and the impact of artificial intelligence on labor markets – economists today are grappling with fundamental questions that will shape our collective future. In this special edition of the Public Paper series, all affiliated professors of the UBS Center share their perspectives on these challenges. Their contributions highlight how cutting-edge research conducted at the Department of Economics at the University of Zurich can help us better understand – and potentially solve – some of the most urgent issues of our time.
It is precisely this ambition that defines the UBS Center for Economics in Society. Since its founding, the Center has served as a platform for dialogue between academia, business, and policymakers and as a catalyst for excellence in economic research. That vision goes back to Kaspar Villiger. As the founding Chairman of the Foundation Council, he played a pivotal role in establishing and shaping the UBS Center.
Maya Eden on Google Scholarbrowse
The Good
Author
UZH Professor of Economics, Affiliated Professor at the UBS Center and CEPR
Maya Eden joined the Department of Economics at the University of Zurich as Professor of Economics in July 2024. She earned her Ph.D. in Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 2011. Following her doctoral studies, she spent six years as an economist in the Macroeconomics and Growth Team of the Development Economics Research Group at the World Bank. In 2017, she transitioned to academia as an Assistant Professor of Economics at Brandeis University, where she was promoted to Associate Professor in 2022. Prof. Eden is affiliated with the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR). She co-organizes the Virtual Seminar Series on Normative Economics and Economic Policy, serves as an Associate Editor of the Review of Economic Dynamics and a Co-Editor at Economics and Philosophy.
UZH Professor of Economics, Affiliated Professor at the UBS Center and CEPR
Maya Eden joined the Department of Economics at the University of Zurich as Professor of Economics in July 2024. She earned her Ph.D. in Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 2011. Following her doctoral studies, she spent six years as an economist in the Macroeconomics and Growth Team of the Development Economics Research Group at the World Bank. In 2017, she transitioned to academia as an Assistant Professor of Economics at Brandeis University, where she was promoted to Associate Professor in 2022. Prof. Eden is affiliated with the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR). She co-organizes the Virtual Seminar Series on Normative Economics and Economic Policy, serves as an Associate Editor of the Review of Economic Dynamics and a Co-Editor at Economics and Philosophy.