Knowledge that Transforms

To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
1163 results ✕ Clear filters

Pareto Optimality in Non-Convex Economies

Econometrica 1975 43(5/6), 1010
This article uses the concept of cone of interior displacements, which extends the notion of differentiability, to set up a characterization of Pareto optima in non-convex economies. A general theorem asserting that a Pareto optimum is a PA equilibrium is given and specifications are discussed. It is finally argued that the usual formulation of the doctrine of marginal cost pricingas a doctrine for achieving Pareto optimal states in a non-convex decentralized economy has unsatisfactory logical basis, and a way of defining a minimum degree of centralization inherent to non-convex economies is suggested. THE MAIN RESULTS of the economic theory of allocation of resources rest upon assumptions of convexity: convexity of production sets, and convexity of preferences. The relevance of these assumptions is often doubtful; even if in a many consumer economy the classical statements can be extended to the case of nonconvex preferences (this idea, pointed out first by Farrell [13] and Rothenberg [24], was developed in the general framework of economics with a continuum of agents as introduced by Aumann [4]; see W. Hildenbrand [18 and 19]), the indivisibilities arising in production are often large and create non-convexities that cannot be overlooked. Furthermore, non-convexities may arise with externalities (see Baumol [5], Kolm [20], and Starrett [25]), exchange of information (see Radner [23]), or stock markets (see Dreze [10]). Even if one must take the risk of producing less elegant results, a relevant economic theory cannot ignore non-convexities.

A Note on Consumer's Surplus

Journal of Economic Literature 1975
C ONSUMER S surplus analysis originated with Jules Dupuit and Alfred Marshall in the last century, and ceased long ago being a novelty, but it is fair to say that it is still viewed widely with a certain skepticism. Recently Arnold Harberger has attempted to provide the basis for a concensus on consumer's surplus in the form of several basic postulates that are held to be impelling [5, 1971]. Perhaps he is right in assuming that it is through such a reduction to axiomatic fundamentals that persisting doubts can be resolved one way or the other, but to obtain such a result, I believe it is also necessary for those concerned with consumer's surplus (and who in economics can afford not to be?) to face more squarely than they often seem to have done issues posed long ago by this much quoted passage in Paul Samuelson's Foundations: