IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qsh/wpaper/8325.html

Efficient Allocations under Ambiguity

Author

Listed:
  • Tomasz Strzalecki
  • Jan Werner

Abstract

An important implication of the expected utility model under risk aversion is that if agents have the same probability belief, then the efficient allocations under uncertainty are comonotone with the aggregate endowment, and if their beliefs are concordant, then the efficient allocations are measurable with respect to the aggregate endowment. We study these two properties of efficient allocations for models of preferences that exhibit ambiguity aversion using the concept of conditional belief, which we introduce in this paper. We provide characterizations of such conditional beliefs for the standard models of preferences used in applications. ?

Suggested Citation

  • Tomasz Strzalecki & Jan Werner, "undated". "Efficient Allocations under Ambiguity," Working Paper 8325, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    • Handle: RePEc:qsh:wpaper:8325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://scholar.harvard.edu/tomasz/node/8325
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Boonen, Tim J. & Jiang, Wenjun, 2022. "Bilateral risk sharing in a comonotone market with rank-dependent utilities," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 361-378.
    2. Gottardi, Piero & Tallon, Jean Marc & Ghirardato, Paolo, 2017. "Flexible contracts," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 145-167.
    3. Beissner, Patrick & Werner, Jan, 2023. "Optimal allocations with α-MaxMin utilities, Choquet expected utilities, and Prospect Theory," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(3), July.
    4. Eisei Ohtaki, 2023. "Optimality in an OLG model with nonsmooth preferences," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 19(3), pages 611-659, September.
    5. Werner, Jan, 2011. "Risk aversion for variational and multiple-prior preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 382-390.
    6. Spyros Galanis, 2021. "Dynamic consistency, valuable information and subjective beliefs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1467-1497, June.
    7. Sujoy Mukerji & Han N. Ozsoylev & Jean‐Marc Tallon, 2023. "Trading Ambiguity: A Tale Of Two Heterogeneities," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 1127-1164, August.
    8. Ghirardato, Paolo & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2018. "Risk sharing in the small and in the large," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 730-765.
    9. Jan Werner, 2021. "Participation in risk sharing under ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 507-519, May.
    10. Han Ozsoylev & Jan Werner, 2011. "Liquidity and asset prices in rational expectations equilibrium with ambiguous information," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 469-491, October.
    11. Mario Ghossoub & Giulio Principi & Ruodu Wang, 2024. "Allocation Mechanisms in Decentralized Exchange Markets with Frictions," Papers 2404.10900, arXiv.org.
    12. Chi, Yichun & Peter, Richard & Wei, Wei, 2025. "On the optimality of straight deductibles under smooth ambiguity aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    13. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Kelsey, David, 2015. "Sharing ambiguous risks," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1-8.
    14. Felix-Benedikt Liebrich, 2021. "Risk sharing under heterogeneous beliefs without convexity," Papers 2108.05791, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    15. Corbae, Dean & Marimon, Ramon, 2011. "Introduction to Incompleteness and Uncertainty in Economics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(3), pages 775-784, May.
    16. Lensman, Todd & Troshkin, Maxim, 2022. "Implications of uncertainty for optimal policies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    17. Patrick Beissner, 2017. "Equilibrium prices and trade under ambiguous volatility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 64(2), pages 213-238, August.
    18. Liebrich, Felix-Benedikt & Svindland, Gregor, 2019. "Efficient allocations under law-invariance: A unifying approach," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 28-45.
    19. Piero Gottardi & Jean-Marc Tallon & Paolo Ghirardato, 2015. "Flexible contracts," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01238046, HAL.
    20. Araujo A. & Chateauneuf A. & Gama-Torres J. & Novinski R., 2014. "General equilibrium, risk taking and volatility," Working Papers 2014-181, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    21. Michail Anthropelos & Paul Schneider, 2021. "Optimal Investment and Equilibrium Pricing under Ambiguity," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 21-78, Swiss Finance Institute.
    22. Luciano Castro & Alain Chateauneuf, 2011. "Ambiguity aversion and trade," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 243-273, October.
    23. Patrick Beissner & Frank Riedel, 2019. "Equilibria Under Knightian Price Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(1), pages 37-64, January.
    24. Alain Chateauneuf & Luciano De Castro, 2011. "Ambiguity Aversion and Absence of Trade," Discussion Papers 1535, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    25. Jean-Gabriel Lauzier & Liyuan Lin & Peter Wakker & Ruodu Wang, 2024. "Optimal risk sharing, equilibria, and welfare with empirically realistic risk attitudes," Papers 2401.03328, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:qsh:wpaper:8325. 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: Richard Brandon The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Richard Brandon to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbrssus.html .

    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.