Equilibrium and Rationality: Context and History-Dependence

  • Jean-François Mertens
Part of the International Economic Association Series book series (IEA)


I will first argue that a full solution theory for non-co-operative games requires several levels of analysis — the self-enforcing aspect (‘equilibrium’) being only the first of them, and that each of those levels has its own invariance (‘context-independence’) requirements. Of those different levels, only the first is more or less well understood.


Mixed Strategy Pure Strategy Solution Concept Reasonable Theory Sequential Equilibrium 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arrow, K. J. (1951) Social Choice and Individual Values (New York: Wiley).Google Scholar
  2. Arrow, K. J. (1963) Social Choice and Individual Values (New York: Wiley) 2nd edn.Google Scholar
  3. Austen-Smith, D. (1979) ‘Fair Rights’, Economics Letters, vol. 4, pp. 29–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Austen-Smith, D. (1982) ‘Restricted Pareto and Rights’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 26, pp. 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes, J. (1980) ‘Freedom, Rationality, and Paradox’, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 10, pp. 545–65.Google Scholar
  6. Barry, B. (1986) ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover and Doctor Fisher’s Bomb Party: Liberalism, Pareto Optimality, and the Problem of Objectionable Preferences’, in J. Elster and A. Hylland (eds) Foundations of Social Choice Theory, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp. 11–43.Google Scholar
  7. Basu, K. (1984) ‘The Rights to Give up Rights’, Economica, vol. 15, pp. 413–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Batra, R. N. and Pattanaik, P. K. (1972) ‘On Some Suggestions for Having Non-Binary Social Choice Functions’, Theory and Decision, vol. 3, pp. 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bergson, A. (1954) ‘On the Concept of Social Welfare’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 68, pp. 233–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berlin, I. (1969) Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
  11. Bernholz, P. (1974) ‘Is a Paretian Liberal Really Impossible?’, Public Choice, vol. 20, pp. 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bernholz, P. (1975) ‘Is a Paretian Liberal Impossible: A Rejoinder’, Public Choice, vol. 23, pp. 69–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blau, J. H. (1975) ‘Liberal Values and Independence’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 42, pp. 395–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Breyer, F. and Gardner, G. (1980) ‘Liberal Paradox, Game Equilibrium, and Gibbard Optimum’, Public Choice, vol. 35, pp. 469–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Buchanan, J. (1976) ‘An Ambiguity in Sen’s Alleged Proof of the Impossibility of the Paretian Liberal’, mimeograph, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.Google Scholar
  16. Chapman, B. (1983) ‘Rights as Constraints: Nozick Versus Sen’, Theory and Decision, vol. 15, pp. 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Coughlin, P. J. (1986) ‘Rights and the Private Pareto Principle’, Economica, vol. 53, pp. 303–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dasgupta, P. (1980) ‘Decentralization and Rights’, Economica, vol. 47, pp. 107–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dworkin, R. (1978) Taking Rights Seriously (London: Duckworth).Google Scholar
  20. Farrell, M. J. (1976) ‘Liberalism in the Theory of Social Choice’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 43, pp. 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Feinberg, J. (1980) Rights, Justice, and the Bounds of Liberty (Princeton: Princeton University Press). Foley, D. K. (1967) ‘Resource Allocation and the Public Sector’, Yale Economic Essays, vol. 7, pp. 45–98. Gaertner, W. (1982) ‘Envy-Free Rights Assignments and Self-Oriented Preferences’, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol. 2, pp. 199–208.Google Scholar
  22. Gaertner, W. and Kruger, L. (1981) ‘Self-Supporting Preferences and Individual Rights: the Possibility of Paretian Liberalism, Economica, vol. 48, pp. 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gaertner, W., Pattanaik, P. K. and Suzumura, K. (1988) ‘Individual Rights Revisited’, mimeograph. Hitotsubashi University.Google Scholar
  24. Gardenfors, P. (1981) ‘Rights, Games and Social Choice’, Nous, vol. 15, pp. 341–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gibbard, A. (1973) ‘Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result’, Econometrica, vol. 41, pp. 587–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gibbard, A. (1974) ‘A Pareto Consistent Libertarian Claim’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 7, pp. 388–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gibbard, A. (1982) ‘Rights and the Theory of Social Choice’ in L. J. Cohen, J. Los, H. Pfeifer and K.-P. Podewski (eds) Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science (Amsterdam: North Holland) pp. 595–605.Google Scholar
  28. Gray, J. (1984) Hayek on Liberty (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).Google Scholar
  29. Hammond, P. J. (1982) ‘Liberalism, Independence Rights and the Pareto Principle’, in Cohen, et al. (eds) Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, pp. 607–20.Google Scholar
  30. Hansson, S. O. (1988) ‘Rights and the Liberal Paradoxes’, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 91.5, pp., 287–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harel, A. and Nitzan, S. (1987) ‘The Libertarian Resolution of the Paretian Liberal Paradox’, Zeitschrift für Nationalokonomie, vol. 47, pp. 337–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hayek, F. A. von (1960) The Constitution of Liberty (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul).Google Scholar
  33. Hayek, F. A. von (1973) Rules and Order, vol. 1 of Law, Legislation and Liberty (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  34. Hohfeld, W. N. (1919) Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning (New Haven: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
  35. Kanger, S. and Kanger, H. (1972) ‘Rights and Parliamentalism’ in R. E. Olson, and A. M. Paul (eds) in Contemporary Philosophy in Scandinavia, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press) pp. 213–36.Google Scholar
  36. Kelly, J. S. (1976) ‘The Impossibility of a Just Liberal’, Economica, vol. 43, pp. 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kelly, J. S. (1976a) ‘Rights Exercising and a Pareto-Consistent Libertarian Claim’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 13, pp. 138–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kelly, J. S. (1987) ‘An Interview with Kenneth J. Arrow’, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 4, pp. 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kelsey, D. (1985) ‘The Liberal Paradox: A Generalization’, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 1, pp. 245–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kelsey, D. (1988) ‘What is Responsible for the “Paretian Epidemic”?’, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 5, pp. 303–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kornai, J. (1988) ‘Individual Freedom and Reform of the Socialist Economy’, European Economic Review, vol. 32, pp. 233–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Levi, I. (1982) ‘Liberty and Welfare’, in A. Sen and S. Williams (eds) Utilitarianism and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp. 239–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lindbeck, A. (1988) ‘Individual Freedom and Welfare State Policy’, European Economic Review, vol. 32, pp. 295–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mill, J. S. (1859) On Liberty, reprinted in M. Warnock (ed.) Utilitarianism (London: Fontana, 1973).Google Scholar
  45. Nozick, R. (1974) Anarchy, State and Utopia (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).Google Scholar
  46. Plott, C. R. (1976) ‘Axiomatic Social Choice Theory: An Overview and Interpretation’, American Journal of Political Science, vol. 20, pp. 511–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rawls, J. (1971) A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  48. Riley, J. M. (1986) ‘Generalized Social Welfare Functionals: Welfarism, Morality and Liberty’, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 3, pp. 233–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Robbins, L. (1961) ‘Hayek on Liberty’, Economica, vol. 28, pp. 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rousseau, J. J. (1754) Discours sur Vorigine de Vinegalite parmi les hommes, English translation by L. G. Crocker, Discourse on the Origin and Foundation of Inequality among Mankind (New York: Washington Square Press, 1964).Google Scholar
  51. Rowley, C. K. (1978) ‘Liberalism and Collective Choice: A Return to Reality?’, Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, vol. 46, pp. 224–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Seidl, C. (1975) ‘On Liberal Values’, Zeitschrift fürNationalokonomie, vol. 35, pp. 257–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sen, A. K. (1970a) Collective Choice and Social Welfare (San Francisco: Holden-Day, and Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd).Google Scholar
  54. Sen, A. K. (1970b) ‘The Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 78, pp. 152–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sen, A. K. (1975) ‘Is a Paretian Liberal Really Impossible: A Reply’, Public Choice, vol. 21, pp. 111–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sen, A. K. (1976) ‘Liberty, Unanimity and Rights’, Economica, vol. 43, pp. 217–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sen, A. K. (1977a) ‘Social Choice Theory: A Re-Examination’, Econo-metrica, vol. 45, pp. 53–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sen, A. K. (1977b) ‘On Weights and Measures: Informational Constraints in Social Welfare Analysis’, Econometrica, vol. 45, pp. 1539–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sen, A. K. (1979) ‘Personal Utilities and Public Judgements: Or What’s Wrong with Welfare Economies’, Economic Journal, vol. 89, pp. 537–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sen, A. K. (1981) ‘Rights and Agency’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 11, pp. 3–39.Google Scholar
  61. Sen, A. K. (1982) ‘Liberty as Control: An Appraisal’, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, vol. 7, pp. 207–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sen, A. K. (1983) ‘Liberty and Social Choice’, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 80, pp. 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sen, A. K. (1985a) ‘Well-Being, Agency and Freedom: The Deway Lecture 1984’, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 82, pp. 169–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sen, A. K. (1985b) Commodities and Capabilities (Amsterdam: North-Holland).Google Scholar
  65. Sen, A. K. (1986) ‘Foundation of Social Choice Theory: An Epilogue’ in J. Elster and A. Hylland (eds) Foundations of Social Choice Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp. 213–48.Google Scholar
  66. Sen, A. K. (1988) ‘Freedom of Choice: Concept and Content’, European Economic Review, vol. 32, pp. 269–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sugden, R. (1978) ‘Social Choice and Individual Liberty’ in M. Artis, and A. R. Nobay (eds) Contemporary Economic Analysis (London: Croom Helm) pp. 243–71.Google Scholar
  68. Sugden, R. (1985) ‘Liberty, Preference, and Choice’, Economics and Philosophy, vol. 1, pp. 213–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Suzumura, K. (1978) ‘On the Consistency of Libertarian Claims’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 45, pp. 329–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Suzumura, K. (1979) ‘On the Consistency of Libertarian Claims: A Correction’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 46, p. 743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Suzumura, K. (1980) ‘Liberal Paradox and the Voluntary Exchange of Rights Exercising’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 22, pp. 407–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Suzumura, K. (1982) ‘Equity, Efficiency and Rights in Social Choice’, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol. 3, pp. 131–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Suzumura, K. (1983) Rational Choice, Collective Decisions, and Social Welfare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Suzumura, K. (1989) Can Pareto Libertarian Paradox be Resolved by Voluntary Exchange of Libertarian Rights? Murphy Institute of Political Economy, Tulane University.Google Scholar
  75. Suzumura, K. and Suga, K. (1986) ‘Gibbardian Libertarian Claims Revisited’, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 3, pp. 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Thomson, W. and Varian, H. R. (1985) ‘Theories of Justice Based on Symmetry’, in L. Hurwicz, D. Schmeidler, and H. Sonnenschein (eds) Social Goals and Social Organization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp. 297–307.Google Scholar
  77. Varian, H. R. (1974) ‘Equity, Envy and Efficiency’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 9, pp. 64–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wriglesworth, J. L. (1982) ‘Using Justice Principles to Resolve the “Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal”‘, Economics Letters, vol. 10, pp. 217–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wriglesworth, J. L. (1985) ‘Respecting Individual Rights in Social Choice’, Oxford Economic Papers, vol. 37, pp. 100–17.Google Scholar
  80. Wriglesworth, J. L. (1985a) Libertarian Conflicts in Social Choice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Economic Association 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-François Mertens
    • 1
  1. 1.Universite Catholique De LouvainBelgium

Personalised recommendations