When Should Neural Data Inform Welfare? A Critical Framework for Policy Uses of Neuroeconomics

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yiven, Zhu
Format: Preprint
Published: 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866912727398612992
author Yiven
Zhu
author_facet Yiven
Zhu
contents Neuroeconomics promises to ground welfare analysis in neural and computational evidence about how people value outcomes, learn from experience and exercise self-control. At the same time, policy and commercial actors increasingly invoke neural data to justify paternalistic regulation, "brain-based" interventions and new welfare measures. This paper asks under what conditions neural data can legitimately inform welfare judgements for policy rather than merely describing behaviour. I develop a non-empirical, model-based framework that links three levels: neural signals, computational decision models and normative welfare criteria. Within an actor-critic reinforcement-learning model, I formalise the inference path from neural activity to latent values and prediction errors and then to welfare claims. I show that neural evidence constrains welfare judgements only when the neural-computational mapping is well validated, the decision model identifies "true" interests versus context-dependent mistakes, and the welfare criterion is explicitly specified and defended. Applying the framework to addiction, neuromarketing and environmental policy, I derive a Neuroeconomic Welfare Inference Checklist for regulators and for designers of NeuroAI systems. The analysis treats brains and artificial agents as value-learning systems while showing that internal reward signals, whether biological or artificial, are computational quantities and cannot be treated as welfare measures without an explicit normative model.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2511_19548
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle When Should Neural Data Inform Welfare? A Critical Framework for Policy Uses of Neuroeconomics
Yiven
Zhu
Machine Learning
Artificial Intelligence
Computers and Society
General Economics
Economics
Neurons and Cognition
Neuroeconomics promises to ground welfare analysis in neural and computational evidence about how people value outcomes, learn from experience and exercise self-control. At the same time, policy and commercial actors increasingly invoke neural data to justify paternalistic regulation, "brain-based" interventions and new welfare measures. This paper asks under what conditions neural data can legitimately inform welfare judgements for policy rather than merely describing behaviour. I develop a non-empirical, model-based framework that links three levels: neural signals, computational decision models and normative welfare criteria. Within an actor-critic reinforcement-learning model, I formalise the inference path from neural activity to latent values and prediction errors and then to welfare claims. I show that neural evidence constrains welfare judgements only when the neural-computational mapping is well validated, the decision model identifies "true" interests versus context-dependent mistakes, and the welfare criterion is explicitly specified and defended. Applying the framework to addiction, neuromarketing and environmental policy, I derive a Neuroeconomic Welfare Inference Checklist for regulators and for designers of NeuroAI systems. The analysis treats brains and artificial agents as value-learning systems while showing that internal reward signals, whether biological or artificial, are computational quantities and cannot be treated as welfare measures without an explicit normative model.
title When Should Neural Data Inform Welfare? A Critical Framework for Policy Uses of Neuroeconomics
topic Machine Learning
Artificial Intelligence
Computers and Society
General Economics
Economics
Neurons and Cognition
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.19548