Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Arrovian Aggregation of Generalised Expected-Utility Preferences: (Im)possibility Results by Means of Model Theory

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cerreia-Vioglio et al. (Econ Theory 48(2–3):341–375, 2011) have proposed a very general axiomatisation of preferences in the presence of ambiguity, viz. Monotonic Bernoullian Archimedean preference orderings. This paper investigates the problem of Arrovian aggregation of such preferences—and proves dictatorial impossibility results for both finite and infinite populations. Applications for the special case of aggregating expected-utility preferences are given. A novel proof methodology for special aggregation problems, based on model theory (in the sense of mathematical logic), is employed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anscombe, F. J., and R. J. Aumann, A definition of subjective probability, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34:199–205, 1963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Arrow, K. J., Social Choice and Individual Values. Cowles Commission Monographs, vol. 12, 2nd edn., Wiley, New York (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brown, D. J., Aggregation of preferences, Quarterly Journal of Economics 89(3):456–469, 1975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Campbell, D. E., Intergenerational social choice without the Pareto principle, Journal of Economic Theory 50(2):414–423, 1990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cerreia-Vioglio, S., P. Ghirardato, F. Maccheroni, M. Marinacci, and M. Siniscalchi, Rational preferences under ambiguity, Economic Theory 48(2–3):341–375, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chambers, C. P., and T. Hayashi, Preference aggregation under uncertainty: Savage vs. Pareto, Games and Economic Behavior 54(2):430–440, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. d’Aspremont, C., and L. Gevers, Social welfare functionals and interpersonal comparability, in K. J. Arrow, A. K. Sen, and K. Suzumura (eds.), Handbook of social choice and welfare. Volume I, vol. 19, Handbooks in Economics, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2002, pp. 459–541.

  8. Dokow, E., and R. Holzman, Aggregation of binary evaluations, Journal of Economic Theory 145(2):495–511, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ellsberg, D., Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms, Quarterly Journal of Economics 75(4):643–669, 1961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Feferman, S., Some applications of the notions of forcing and generic sets, Fundamenta Mathematicae 56:325–345, 1965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fishburn, P. C., Arrow’s impossibility theorem: concise proof and infinite voters, Journal of Economic Theory 2(1):103–106, 1970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gajdos, T., J. M. Tallon, and J. C. Vergnaud, Representation and aggregation of preferences under uncertainty, Journal of Economic Theory 141(1):68–99, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gilboa, I., D. Samet, and D. Schmeidler, Utilitarian aggregation of beliefs and tastes, Journal of Political Economy 112(4):932–938, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gilboa, I., and D. Schmeidler, Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior, Journal of Mathematical Economics 18(2):141–153, 1989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Halpern, J. D., and A. Levy, The Boolean prime ideal theorem does not imply the axiom of choice, in D. Scott (ed.), Axiomatic Set Theory, vol. XIII, part 1 of Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1971, pp. 83–134.

  16. Hansen, L. P., and T. J. Sargent, Robust control and model uncertainty, American Economic Review 91(2):60–66, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hansson, B., The existence of group preference functions, Public Choice 38:89–98, 1976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Harsanyi, J. C., Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility, Journal of Political Economy 63(4):309–321, 1955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Herzberg, F. S., The (im)possibility of collective risk measurement: Arrovian aggregation of variational preferences, Economic Theory Bulletin 1(1):69–92, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Herzberg, F. S., and D. Eckert, Impossibility results for infinite-electorate abstract aggregation rules, Journal of Philosophical Logic 41(1):273–286, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Herzberg, F. S., and D. Eckert, The model-theoretic approach to aggregation: Impossibility results for finite and infinite electorates, Mathematical Social Sciences 64(1):41–47, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hylland, A., Aggregation procedure for cardinal preferences: A comment, Econometrica 48(2):539–542, 1980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kalai, E., and D. Schmeidler, Aggregation procedure for cardinal preferences: a formulation and proof of Samuelson’s impossiblility conjecture, Econometrica 45(6):1431–1438, 1977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Keisler, H. J., Model theory for infinitary logic. Logic with countable conjunctions and finite quantifiers, vol. 62, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1971.

  25. Kirman, A. P., and D. Sondermann, Arrow’s theorem, many agents, and invisible dictators, Journal of Economic Theory 5(2):267–277, 1972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kuzmics, C., A rational ambiguity averse person will never display her ambiguity aversion. Technical report, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University, April 2013.

  27. Lauwers, L., and L. Van Liedekerke, Ultraproducts and aggregation, Journal of Mathematical Economics 24(3):217–237, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Le Breton, M., Essais sur les fondements de l’analyse économique de l’inégalité. Thèse pour le Doctorat d’État en Sciences Économiques, Université de Rennes 1, 1986.

  29. List, C., and C. Puppe, Judgment aggregation: A survey, in P. Anand, P. K. Pattanaik, and C. Puppe (eds.), The Handbook of Rational and Social Choice: An Overview of New Foundations and Applications, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2009, pp. 457–482.

  30. Łoś, J., Quelques remarques, théorèmes et problèmes sur les classes définissables d’algèbres, in T. Skolem, G. Hasenjaeger, G. Kreisel, A. Robinson, H. Wang, L. Henkin, and J. Łoś (eds.), Mathematical interpretation of formal systems, vol. 16 Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1955, pp. 98–113.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Maccheroni, F., M. Marinacci, and A. Rustichini, Ambiguity aversion, robustness, and the variational representation of preferences, Econometrica, 74(6):1447–1498, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Millner, A., S. Dietz, and G. Heal, Ambiguity and climate policy, Working Paper 16050, National Bureau of Economic Research, June 2010.

  33. Riedel, F., and L. Sass, Ellsberg games, Theory and Decision 76(4):469–509, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Salonen, H., and K. Saukkonen, On continuity of Arrovian social welfare functions, Social Choice and Welfare 25(1):85–93, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sen, A. K., Collective Choice and Social Welfare. Mathematical Economics Texts, vol. 5, Holden-Day, San Francisco, CA, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Zuber, S., Harsanyi’s theorem without the sure-thing principle: on the consistent aggregation of Monotonic Bernoullian and Archimedean preferences, Journal of Mathematical Economics 63:78–83, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Mathematical Economics (IMW), Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany

    Frederik Herzberg

  2. Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies of Science (I²SoS), Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany

    Frederik Herzberg

  3. Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy (MCMP), Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, 80539, Munich, Germany

    Frederik Herzberg

Authors
  1. Frederik Herzberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frederik Herzberg.

Additional information

Special Issue: Logics for Social Behaviour

Edited by Alessandra Palmigiano and Marcus Pivato

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Herzberg, F. Arrovian Aggregation of Generalised Expected-Utility Preferences: (Im)possibility Results by Means of Model Theory. Stud Logica 106, 947–967 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-016-9706-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-016-9706-8

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation