IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01437441.html

Separate aggregation of beliefs and values under ambiguity

Author

Listed:
  • Xiangyu Qu

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Maximin expected utility model for individual decision making under ambiguity prescribes that the individual posits independently a utility function and a set of probability distributions over events to represent the values and belief, respectively. It assumes that individual evaluates each act on the basis of its minimum expected utility over this class of distributions. In this paper, we attempt to generalize the model to social decision making. It is assumed that the society's belief is formed through a linear aggregation of individual beliefs and society's values through a linear aggregation of individual values. We propose principles which characterize such separate aggregation procedures. We also generalize Choquet expected utility model, which posits a nonadditive measure over events and a utility function to represent belief and values, respectively. We prove that the only aggregation procedures that respect our principles are the separate linear aggregations of beliefs and values

Suggested Citation

  • Xiangyu Qu, 2017. "Separate aggregation of beliefs and values under ambiguity," Post-Print hal-01437441, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01437441
    DOI: 10.1007/s00199-015-0944-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Takashi Hayashi & Michele Lombardi, 2019. "Fair social decision under uncertainty and belief disagreements," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(4), pages 775-816, June.
    2. Dong-Xuan, Bach & Qu, Xiangyu, 2025. "Restricted dominant unanimity and social discounting," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    3. Pierre Bardier & Bach Dong-Xuan & Van-Quy Nguyen, 2024. "Hoping for the best while preparing for the worst in the face of uncertainty: a new type of incomplete preferences," Papers 2406.11166, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2025.
    4. Panagiotis Andrikopoulos & Nick Webber, 2019. "Understanding time-inconsistent heterogeneous preferences in economics and finance: a practice theory approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 282(1), pages 3-26, November.
    5. Florian Mudekereza, 2025. "Robust Aggregation of Preferences," Papers 2504.07401, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2026.
    6. Philippe Mongin & Marcus Pivato, 2021. "Rawls’s difference principle and maximin rule of allocation: a new analysis," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1499-1525, June.
    7. Philippe Mongin & Marcus Pivato, 2020. "Social preference under twofold uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(3), pages 633-663, October.
    8. Łukasz Balbus, 2020. "On recursive utilities with non-affine aggregator and conditional certainty equivalent," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(2), pages 551-577, September.
    9. Fleurbaey, Marc & Zuber, Stéphane, 2017. "Fair management of social risk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 666-706.
    10. Berens, Stefan & Chochua, Lasha, 2017. "The impartial observer under uncertainty," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 576, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    11. Kaname Miyagishima, 2022. "Efficiency, equity, and social rationality under uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 73(1), pages 237-255, February.
    12. Eric Danan & Thibault Gajdos & Brian Hill & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2016. "Robust Social Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(9), pages 2407-2425, September.
    13. McCarthy, David & Mikkola, Kalle & Thomas, Teruji, 2016. "Utilitarianism with and without expected utility," MPRA Paper 72578, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Hayashi, Takashi, 2024. "Belief aggregation, updating and dynamic collective choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    15. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2019. "Aggregation of Bayesian preferences: unanimity vs monotonicity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(3), pages 419-451, March.
    16. Pivato, Marcus, 2022. "Bayesian social aggregation with accumulating evidence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    17. Marcus Pivato & Élise Flore Tchouante, 2024. "Bayesian social aggregation with non-Archimedean utilities and probabilities," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 77(3), pages 561-595, May.
    18. Miyagishima, Kaname, 2019. "Fair criteria for social decisions under uncertainty," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 77-87.
    19. McCarthy, David & Mikkola, Kalle & Thomas, Teruji, 2020. "Utilitarianism with and without expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 77-113.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01437441. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.