Theory and Decision

, Volume 51, Issue 2–4, pp 173–181 | Cite as

A No-Trade Theorem under Knightian Uncertainty with General Preferences

  • Chenghu Ma


This paper derives a no-trade theorem under Knightian uncertainty, which generalizes the theorem of Milgrom and Stokey (1982, Journal of Economic Theory 26, 17) by allowing general preference relations. It is shown that the no-trade theorem holds true as long as agents' preferences are dynamically consistent in the sense of Machina and Schmeidler (1991, Econometrica 60, 745), and satisfies the so-called piece-wise monotonicity axiom. A preference satisfying the piece-wise monotonicity axiom does not necessarily imply the additive utility representation, nor is necessarily based on beliefs.

Uncertainty Piecewise monotonicity Generalized expected utility 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aumann R. (1976), Agreeing to disagree, Annals of Statistics 4, 1236-1239.Google Scholar
  2. Dow J., Madrigal, V. and da Costa Werlang, S.R. (1990), Preferences, common knowledge, and speculative trade, Working paper, Fundaçao Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
  3. Ellsberg D. (1961), Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms, Quarterly Journal of Economics 75 643-669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Epstein L. and Le Breton, M. (1993), Dynamically consistent beliefs must be Bayesian, Journal of Economic Theory 61, 1-22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Geanakoplos, J. (1994), Common knowledge, In: R. Aumann and S. Hart (eds.), Handbook of Game Theory, Volume 2. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  6. Ghirardato P. (1994), Copying with ignorance: Unforeseen contingencies and non-additive uncertainty, UC at Berkeley, mimeo.Google Scholar
  7. Gilboa I. and Schmeidler, D. (1989), Maximin expected utility with non-unique prior, Journal of Mathematical Economics, 18, 141-153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Holstrom B. and Myerson, R. (1983), Efficient and durable decision rules with incomplete information, Econometrica 51, 1799-1819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Machina M. and Schmeidler, D. (1992), A more robust definition of subjective probability, Econometrica 60, 745-780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Milgrom P. and Stokey, N. (1982), Information, trade and common knowledge, Journal of Economic Theory 26, 17-27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rubinstein A. and Wolinsky, A. (1990), On the Logic of 'agreeing on disagree' type results, Journal of Economic Theory 51, 184-193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Savage L.J. (1954), The Foundations of Statistics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Schmeidler D. (1989), Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity, Econometrica 57, 571-587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chenghu Ma
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Accounting, Finance and ManagementUniversity of EssexColchester, EssexUK

Personalised recommendations