Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Preference Relativity, Ambiguity and Social Welfare Evaluation

Contents:

Author Info

  • Zhijun Zhao

    (Institute of Economics Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and Hong Kong Institute for Monetary Research)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    In the real world many social and economic decisions have to be made with imperfect information and uncertainty. In the past two decades, economists and mathematicians have devoted a great deal of time and effort into the study of ambiguity and much progress has been made in modeling ambiguity. Decision models under ambiguity have been widely used in portfolio selection, asset pricing, and risk measurement. However, few studies have been done on linking ambiguity to the social welfare function, although social welfare evaluation also faces a scarcity of information and ambiguity of income distribution. In this paper I set up a framework with policy relevance for social welfare evaluation, with the help of a model that is developed to handle income distribution ambiguity. Under some reasonable conditions the relation of income distribution to social preference is identified and the social welfare function is clearly expressed. It is shown that the social welfare functions derived from the framework are robust in form and invariant up to a monotonous increasing transformation. The framework is also flexible enough to contain many thoughtful ideas about the social welfare function.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.hkimr.org/uploads/publication/45/ub_full_0_2_301_wp-no-35_2011-final-.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Hong Kong Institute for Monetary Research in its series Working Papers with number 352011.

    as in new window
    Length: 36 pages
    Date of creation: Nov 2011
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:hkm:wpaper:352011

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: 55th Floor , Two International Finance Centre , 8 Finance Street , Central, Hong Kong
    Phone: (852)2878 1978
    Fax: (852)2878 7006
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.hkimr.org
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: Preference; Ambiguity; Income Distribution; Social Welfare Function;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Aiyagari, S Rao, 1994. "Uninsured Idiosyncratic Risk and Aggregate Saving," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 109(3), pages 659-84, August.
    2. Yew-Kwang Ng, 1999. "Utility, informed preference, or happiness: Following Harsanyi's argument to its logical conclusion," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 197-216.
    3. Epstein, Larry G. & Schneider, Martin, 2003. "Recursive multiple-priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 1-31, November.
    4. Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2008. "Ambiguity, Information Quality, and Asset Pricing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, American Finance Association, vol. 63(1), pages 197-228, 02.
    5. Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2010. "Ambiguity and Asset Markets," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 315-346, December.
    6. Sen, Amartya, 1973. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, Oxford University Press, number 9780198281931, October.
    7. Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Aldo Rustichini & Marco Taboga, 2004. "Portfolio Selection with Monotone Mean-Variance Preferences," Carlo Alberto Notebooks, Collegio Carlo Alberto 6, Collegio Carlo Alberto, revised 2007.
    8. Machina,Mark & Schmeidler,David, 1991. "A more robust definition of subjective probability," Discussion Paper Serie A, University of Bonn, Germany 365, University of Bonn, Germany.
    9. Uzi Segal, 1985. "The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach," UCLA Economics Working Papers, UCLA Department of Economics 362, UCLA Department of Economics.
    10. Zengjing Chen & Larry Epstein, 2002. "Ambiguity, Risk, and Asset Returns in Continuous Time," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1403-1443, July.
    11. Massimo Marinacci, 2001. "Probabilistic sophistication and multiple priors," ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research 08-2001, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    12. Huggett, Mark, 1997. "The one-sector growth model with idiosyncratic shocks: Steady states and dynamics," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 385-403, August.
    13. Hammond, Peter J, 1976. "Equity, Arrow's Conditions, and Rawls' Difference Principle," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 44(4), pages 793-804, July.
    14. Halevy, Yoram, 2005. "Ellsberg Revisited: an Experimental Study," Microeconomics.ca working papers, Vancouver School of Economics halevy-05-07-26-11-51-13, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 25 Feb 2014.
    15. Sen, Amartya K, 1977. "On Weights and Measures: Informational Constraints in Social Welfare Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 45(7), pages 1539-72, October.
    16. Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven, 1999. "The Conflict between Notions of Fairness and the Pareto Principle," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1-2), pages 63-77, Fall.
    17. Kaplow, Louis, 1996. " Optimal Distribution and the Family," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 98(1), pages 75-92, March.
    18. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2005. "A Smooth Model of Decision Making under Ambiguity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 73(6), pages 1849-1892, November.
    19. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    20. Amartya Sen, 1999. "The Possibility of Social Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 349-378, June.
    21. Jianjun Miao, 2003. "Competitive Equilibria of Economies with a Continuum of Consumers and Aggregate Shocks," Macroeconomics, EconWPA 0310001, EconWPA.
    22. Parks, Robert P, 1976. "An Impossibility Theorem for Fixed Preferences: A Dictatorial Bergson-Samuelson Welfare Function," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 447-50, October.
    23. Philippe Artzner & Freddy Delbaen & Jean-Marc Eber & David Heath, 1999. "Coherent Measures of Risk," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 203-228.
    24. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1950. "A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58, pages 328.
    25. Huggett, Mark & Ospina, Sandra, 2001. "Does productivity growth fall after the adoption of new technology?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 173-195, August.
    26. Yew-Kwang, Ng, 1997. "A case for Happiness, Cardinalism, and Interpersonal Comparability," Departmental Working Papers, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Department of Economics _081, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Department of Economics.
    27. Louis Kaplow, 1992. "Optimal Distribution and Taxation of the Family," NBER Working Papers 4189, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    28. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63, pages 309.
    29. Fisher, Irving, 1918. "Is "Utility" the Most Suitable Term for the Concept It is Used to Denote?," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 8, pages 335-337.
    30. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hkm:wpaper:352011. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (HKIMR).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.