IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Economic policy when models disagree

  • Pauline Barrieu
  • Bernard Sinclair Desgagne

This paper proposes a general way to conceive public policy when there is no consensual account of the situation of interest. The approach builds on an extension and dual formulation of the traditional theory of economic policy. It does not need a representative policymaker’s utility function (as in the literature on ambiguity), a reference model (as in robust control theory) or some prior probability distribution over the set of supplied scenarios (as in Bayesian model-averaging). The method requires instead that the willingness to accept a policy’s projected outcomes coincide with the willingness to pay to correct the current situation. Policies constructed in this manner are shown to be e ective, robust and simple in a precise and intuitive sense.

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://eprints.lse.ac.uk/37607/
File Function: Open access version.
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library in its series LSE Research Online Documents on Economics with number 37607.

as
in new window

Length: 29 pages
Date of creation: Dec 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:37607
Contact details of provider: Postal:
LSE Library Portugal Street London, WC2A 2HD, U.K.

Phone: +44 (020) 7405 7686
Web page: http://www.lse.ac.uk/

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.:

as in new window
  1. Dieter Helm, 2008. "Climate-change policy: why has so little been achieved?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 211-238, Summer.
  2. Itzhak Gilboa, 1987. "Expected Utility with Purely Subjective Non-Additive Probabilities," Post-Print hal-00756291, HAL.
  3. Garlappi, Lorenzo & Uppal, Raman & Wang, Tan, 2005. "Portfolio Selection with Parameter and Model Uncertainty: A Multi-Prior Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 5041, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  4. Hart, Oliver & Zingales, Luigi, 2009. "A New Capital Regulation For Large Financial Institutions," CEPR Discussion Papers 7298, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  5. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
  6. repec:hal:journl:halshs-00086021 is not listed on IDEAS
  7. Manne, Alan & Mendelsohn, Robert & Richels, Richard, 1995. "MERGE : A model for evaluating regional and global effects of GHG reduction policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 17-34, January.
  8. John C. Williams & Andrew T. Levin, 2003. "Robust Monetary Policy with Competing Reference Models," Computing in Economics and Finance 2003 291, Society for Computational Economics.
  9. Catarina Roseta-Palma & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2004. "Robust Control in Water Management," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 21-34, 07.
  10. Eggertsson, Thrainn, 1997. "The old theory of economic policy and the new institutionalism," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1187-1203, August.
  11. Thibault Gajdos & Jean-Marc Tallon & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2002. "Decision Making with Imprecise Probabilistic Information," ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series 18-2003, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research, revised May 2003.
  12. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2002. "A smooth model of decision making under ambiguity," ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series 11-2003, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research, revised Apr 2003.
  13. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew W. Postlewaite & David Schmeidler, 2008. "Probability and Uncertainty in Economic Modeling," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 173-88, Summer.
  14. Rama Cont, 2006. "Model Uncertainty And Its Impact On The Pricing Of Derivative Instruments," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 519-547.
  15. Gilbert W. Bassett Jr & Roger Koenker & Gregory Kordas, 2004. "Pessimistic portfolio allocation and Choquet expected utility," CeMMAP working papers CWP09/04, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  16. Richard Clarida & Jordi Galí & Mark Gertler, 1997. "The science of monetary policy: A new Keynesian perspective," Economics Working Papers 356, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Apr 1999.
  17. Antoine Billot & Itzhak Gilboa & David Schmeidler & Dov Samet, 2004. "Probabilities as Similarity-Weighted Frequencies," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1492, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  18. John C. Williams & John B. Taylor, 2009. "A Black Swan in the Money Market," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 58-83, January.
  19. Nordhaus, William D & Yang, Zili, 1996. "A Regional Dynamic General-Equilibrium Model of Alternative Climate-Change Strategies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 741-65, September.
  20. Klaus Adam, 2001. "On the Relation between Robust and Bayesian Decision Making," CSEF Working Papers 68, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
  21. Carmen Fernández & Eduardo Ley & Mark F. J. Steel, . "Benchmark priors for Bayesian Model averaging," Working Papers 98-06, FEDEA.
  22. Helmut Elsinger & Alfred Lehar & Martin Summer, 2006. "Risk Assessment for Banking Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(9), pages 1301-1314, September.
  23. William A. Brock & Steven N. Durlauf & Kenneth D. West, 2003. "Policy Evaluation in Uncertain Economic Environments," NBER Working Papers 10025, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Taylor, John B., 1993. "Discretion versus policy rules in practice," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 195-214, December.
  25. Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2007. "Learning Under Ambiguity," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 1275-1303.
  26. Rama Cont, 2006. "Model uncertainty and its impact on the pricing of derivative instruments," Post-Print halshs-00002695, HAL.
  27. Vardas, Giannis & XEPAPADEAS, Anastasios, 2008. "Model Uncertainty, Ambiguity and the Precautionary Principle: Implications for Biodiversity Management," MPRA Paper 10236, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  28. Chamberlain, Gary, 2000. "Econometrics and decision theory," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 255-283, April.
  29. Giovanni Di Bartolomeo & Nicola Acocella, 2005. "Tinbergen and Theil Meet Nash: Controllability in Policy Games," Working Papers 2005.132, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  30. Christopher A. Sims, 2002. "The Role of Models and Probabilities in the Monetary Policy Process," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 33(2), pages 1-62.
  31. David Schmeidler, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7662, David K. Levine.
  32. John O’Neill, 2009. "Market," Chapters, in: Handbook of Economics and Ethics, chapter 42 Edward Elgar Publishing.
  33. Thomas J. Sargent & LarsPeter Hansen, 2001. "Robust Control and Model Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 60-66, May.
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:ehl:lserod:37607. 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: (LSERO Manager)

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.