![]() | This article possibly contains original research .(May 2024) |
A repugnant market is an area of commerce that is considered by society to be outside of the range of market transactions and that bringing this area into the realm of a market would be inherently immoral or uncaring. For example, many people consider a market in human organs to be a repugnant market [1] or the ability to bet on terrorist acts in prediction market to be repugnant. Others consider the lack of such markets to be even more immoral and uncaring, as trade bans (e.g. in organ transplants [2] [3] [4] and terrorism information) [5] [6] can create avoidable human suffering.
Nobel Laureate Alvin Roth (2007) [7] "introduced in the economics literature the concept of "repugnance" for a transaction as the aversion toward other individuals engaging in it, even if the parties directly involved benefit from that trade (i.e. "There are some things no one should be allowed to do"). Repugnance considerations have important consequences on the types of markets and transactions that we observe and, as such, they impose a challenge for policy and market design." [8]
This section needs additional citations for verification .(May 2008) |
The repugnance of markets varies according to time, culture, and economic development, among other factors. [9] Slavery is a market currently considered repugnant while for most of recorded history before c. 1000 AD it was considered acceptable, and was still considered acceptable against certain people groups until c. 1800 AD. Examples of markets considered repugnant at one time or place include:
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help){{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help)