IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Efficient Allocations under Ambiguity

  • Tomasz Strzalecki
  • Jan Werner

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. ?

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://scholar.harvard.edu/tomasz/node/8325
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Harvard University OpenScholar in its series Working Paper with number 8325.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:qsh:wpaper:8325
Contact details of provider: Postal: 1737 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, MA 02138
Phone: 617-496-2450
Fax: 617-496-5149
Web page: http://scholar.harvard.edu

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. repec:hal:journl:halshs-00174553 is not listed on IDEAS
  2. Sujoy Mukerji & Peter Klibanoff, 2002. "A Smooth Model of Decision,Making Under Ambiguity," Economics Series Working Papers 113, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  3. Itzhak Gilboa & Antoine Billot & Alain Chateauneuf & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2000. "Sharing Beliefs: between Agreeing and Disagreeing," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00753122, HAL.
  4. Klaus Nehring & Michael Magill & Julian R. Betts, 2003. "Capacities And Probabilistic Beliefs: A Precarious Coexistence," Working Papers 978, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
  5. Rigotti, Luca & Shannon, Chris, 2001. "Uncertainty and Risk in Financial Markets," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt6m42r5rr, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  6. Dirk Krueger & Fabrizio Perri, 2009. "Public versus Private Risk Sharing," NBER Working Papers 15582, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Timothy Cogley & ThomasJ. Sargent, 2009. "Diverse Beliefs, Survival and the Market Price of Risk," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(536), pages 354-376, 03.
  8. Martins-da-Rocha, Victor Filipe, 2009. "Interim efficiency with MEU-preferences," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 696, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
  9. Cass, David & Shell, Karl, 1983. "Do Sunspots Matter?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(2), pages 193-227, April.
  10. S. Rao Aiyagari, 1993. "Uninsured idiosyncratic risk and aggregate saving," Working Papers 502, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  11. Atsushi Kajii & Takashi Ui, 2004. "Agreeable Bets with Multiple Priors," KIER Working Papers 581, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
  12. Epstein, Larry G. & Schneider, Martin, 2003. "Recursive multiple-priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 1-31, November.
  13. Chateauneuf, Alain & Faro, José Heleno, 2009. "Ambiguity through confidence functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(9-10), pages 535-558, September.
  14. Strzalecki, Tomasz, 2011. "Axiomatic Foundations of Multiplier Preferences," Scholarly Articles 14397610, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  15. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
  16. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-87, May.
  17. Tallon, Jean-Marc & Dana, Rose-Anne & Chateauneuf, Alain, 2000. "Optimal risk-sharing rules and equilibria with Choquet-expected-utility," Economics Papers from University Paris Dauphine 123456789/5461, Paris Dauphine University.
  18. Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Aldo Rustichini, 2004. "Ambiguity Aversion, Robustness, and the Variational Representation of Preferences," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 12, Collegio Carlo Alberto, revised 2006.
  19. Luca Rigotti & Chris Shannon & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2008. "Subjective Beliefs and ex ante Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(5), pages 1167-1190, 09.
  20. Yaari, Menahem E., 1969. "Some remarks on measures of risk aversion and on their uses," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 315-329, October.
  21. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521586054 is not listed on IDEAS
  22. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
  23. Paul Milgrom & Nancy L.Stokey, 1979. "Information, Trade, and Common Knowledge," Discussion Papers 377R, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  24. Thomas J. Sargent & LarsPeter Hansen, 2001. "Robust Control and Model Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 60-66, May.
  25. repec:hal:journl:halshs-00451997 is not listed on IDEAS
  26. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
  27. Hong, Chew Soo & Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 1987. "Risk aversion in the theory of expected utility with rank dependent probabilities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 370-381, August.
  28. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
  29. Chateauneuf, A. & Dana, R.-A, & Tallon, J.-M., 1997. "Optimal Risk-Sharing Rules and Equilibria With Non-Additive Expected Utility," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 97.54, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
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:qsh:wpaper:8325. 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: (Richard Brandon)

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.