IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Alternative Types of Ambiguity and their Effects on the Probabilistic Properties and Tail Risks of Environmental-Policy Variables

Listed author(s):
  • Phoebe Koundouri
  • Nikitas Pittis


    (University of Piraeus, Greece)

  • Panagiotis Samartzis
  • Nikolaos Englezos


  • Andreas Papandreou


Registered author(s):

    The concept of ambiguity with respect to decision making about climate change has recently attracted a lot of research interest. The standard approach for introducing ambiguity into this framework is to assume that the decision maker (DM) exhibits ambiguity aversion, with the latter being represented by axioms on DMs preferences different than Savageâ��s (sure-thing principle). As a result, DM is deprived of the property of probabilistic sophistication, since she is faced with either multiple prior probability functions, or a single but incoherent one (capacity). This paper approaches the issue of ambiguity with respect to climate change from a different perspective. In particular, we assume that ambiguity does exists but it does not affect the formation of DMs prior probability function. Instead, it a�¤ects the formation of her posterior probability function. Specifically, we assume that there are n experts, who supply DM with probabilistic input. Hence, although DM has a well defined prior (formed before any expert information on objective probabilities has arrived), she cannot decide which piece of information should conditionalize upon (defer to). We refer to this type of ambiguity as "deferential ambiguity" and show that it affects both DM and the experts. We also introduce a second type of ambiguity, which is solely born by the experts. This type of ambiguity stems from the experts potential inability to discern DMs preferences. This ambiguity is referred to as "preferential ambiguity" in the paper. The main objective of the paper is to analyze the possible interactions between the two types of ambiguity mentioned above and to assess their impact on the probabilistic properties (in particular, tail risks) of environmental-policy variables.

    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:
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Athens University of Economics and Business in its series DEOS Working Papers with number 1703.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 00 Aug 2017
    Handle: RePEc:aue:wpaper:1703
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    76, Patission Street, Athens 104 34

    Phone: (+301) 8214021
    Fax: (301) 8214021
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    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.:

    in new window

    1. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    2. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    3. Al-Najjar, Nabil I. & Weinstein, Jonathan, 2009. "Rejoinder: The “Ambiguity Aversion Literature: A Critical Assessment”," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(03), pages 357-369, November.
    4. Al-Najjar, Nabil I. & Weinstein, Jonathan, 2009. "The Ambiguity Aversion Literature: A Critical Assessment," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(03), pages 249-284, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aue:wpaper:1703. 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: (Ekaterini Glynou)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.