Abstract
In his so-called ‘Allais Impossibility Theorem’, Allais (1988) asserts that the technique of ‘generalized expected utility analysis’ from Machina (1982) is invalid, on the ground that its key tool, the ‘local utility function’, cannot be well-defined for preferences over finite-outcome lotteries. This paper presents a brief description of the local utility function and a summary of Allais' argument, and points out two separate errors in the latter. The first error consists of believing that two local utility functions should be affinely equivalent even when their outcome variables differ by a nonlinear transformation. The second error consists of an incorrect derivation of the local utility function, resulting from extending a moment representation function beyond its valid domain, and/or invoking the chain rule at a point where this function is not differentiable.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allais, M.: 1986, ‘Machina's Local Utility and the Allais Impossibility Theorem — Additional Comments’, C.A.E. Manuscript C-4384.
Allais, M.: 1988, ‘A New Neo-Bernoullian Theory: The Machina Theory. A Critical Analysis’, inRisk, Decision and Rationality, edited by B. Munier, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht.
Allen, B.: 1987, ‘Smooth Preferences and the Local Expected Utility Hypothesis’,Journal of Economic Theory 41(2), 340–355.
Chew, S., Epstein, L., and Zilcha, I.: 1988, ‘A Correspondence Theorem between Expected Utility and Smooth Utility’,Journal of Economic Theory 46(1), 186–193.
Chew, S., E. Karni and Z. Safra: 1987, ‘Risk Aversion in the Theory of Expected Utility with Rank Dependent Probabilities’,Journal of Economic Theory 42(2), 370–381.
Chew, S. and Nishimura, N.: 1992, ‘Differentiability, Comparative Statics, and Non-Expected Utility Preferences’,Journal of Economic Theory 56(2), 294–312.
Green, J. and Jullien, B.: 1988, ‘Ordinal Independence in Non-Linear Utility Theory’,Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1(4), 355–387.
Karni, E.: 1987, ‘Generalized Expected Utility Analysis with State-Dependent Preferences’,International Economic Review 28(1) 229–240.
Karni, E.: 1989, ‘Generalized Expected Utility Analysis of Multivariate Risk Aversion’,International Economic Review 30(2), 297–305.
Machina, M.: 1982, ‘“Expected Utility” Analysis without the Independence Axiom’,Econometrica 50(2), 277–323.
Machina, M.: 1983, ‘Generalized Expected Utility Analysis and the Nature of Observed Violations of the Independence Axiom’, inFoundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications, edited by B. Stigum and F. Wenstøp, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht.
Machina, M.: 1984, ‘Temporal Risk and the Nature of Induced Preferences’,Journal of Economic Theory 33(2), 199–231.
Machina, M.: 1987, ‘Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved’,Journal of Economic Perspectives,1(1), 121–154.
Machina, M.: 1988, ‘Cardinal Properties of “Local Utility Functions”’, inRisk, Decision and Rationality, edited by B. Munier, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht.
Machina, M. and Neilson, W.: 1987, ‘The Ross Measure of Risk Aversion: Strengthening and Extension’,55(5), 1139–1149.
Pratt, J.: 1964, ‘Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large’,Econometrica 32(1–2), 122–136.
Röell, A.: 1986, ‘Portfolio Choice in Quiggin and Yaari's Rank-Order Model of Choice under Uncertainty’, manuscript, London School of Economics.
Rothschild, M. and Stiglitz, J.: 1970, ‘Increasing Risk: I. A Definition’,Journal of Economic Theory 2(3), 225–243.
Wang, T.: 1993, ‘L p -Fréchet Differentiable Preference and “Local Utility” Analysis’,Journal of Economic Theory 61(1), 139–159
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Machina, M.J. Two errors in the ‘Allais Impossibility Theorem’. Theor Decis 38, 231–250 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01362234
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01362234