Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Social Choice Re-examined pp 121–174Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

A Unified Perspective on Resource Allocation: Limited Arbitrage is Necessary and Sufficient for the Existence of a Competitive Equilibrium, the Core and Social Choice

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: International Economic Association Series ((IEA))

Abstract

Social diversity is central to resource allocation. People trade because they are different. Gains from trade and the scope for mutually advantageous reallocation depend on the diversity of the traders’ preferences and endowments. The market owes its existence to the diversity of those who make up the economy.

July 1994, revised June 1995 and August 1996. The main results in this paper appeared in ‘Markets, Arbitrage and Social Choice’, a paper presented at the conference ‘Columbia Celebrates Arrow’s Contributions’, Columbia University, New York, 23 October 1991, Invaluable editorial comments and intellectual input from Kenneth Arrow, Walt Heller, Ted Groves, Morris Hirsch and Wayne Shafer are gratefully acknowledged. Research support was provided by National Science Foundation Grants SBR 92-16028 and OMS 94-08798, and by the Sloan Foundation Project on Information Technology and Productivity.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Arrow, K. (1951) Social Choice and Individual Values (New York: John Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. and Hahn, F. (1971) General Competitive Analysis (San Francisco and New York: North-Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. and Debreu, G. (1954) ‘Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy’, Econometrica vol. 22, pp. 264–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baryshnikov, Y. (1993) ‘Unifying Impossibility Theorems: A Topological Approach’, Advances in Applied Mathematics, vol. 14, pp. 404–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, D. (1948) ‘On the Rationale of Group Decision-Making’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 56, pp. 23–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1976) ‘Manifolds of Preferences and Equilibria’, Discussion Paper of the Project on Efficiency of Decision Making in Economic Systems (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1980a) ‘Social Choice and the Topology of Spaces of Preferences’, Advances in Mathematics, vol. 37, pp. 165–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1980b) ‘Intersecting Families of Sets’, working paper, University of Essex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1982) ‘Social Aggregation Rules and Continuity’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 97, pp. 337–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1986) ‘Topological Complexity of Manifolds of Preferences’, in Hildenbrand, W. and Mas-Colell, A. (eds), Essays in Honor of Gerard Debreu (New York: North-Holland), Chapter 8, pp. 131–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1991a) ‘Markets, Arbitrage and Social Choice’, working paper, 586, Columbia University, New York and CORE Discussion Paper, 9342, CORE, Univérsité Catholique de Louvain, Lou vain la Neuve, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1991b) ‘Market Arbitrage, Social Choice and the Core’, forthcoming in Social Choice and Welfare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1993a) ‘On Strategic Control’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 108, pp. 285–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1993b) ‘The Cone Condition, Properness and Extremely Desirable Commodities’, Economic Theory, vol. 3, pp. 177–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1993c) ‘Topology and Economics: the Contribution of Stephen Smale’, in Hirsch, M., Marsden, J. and Shub, M. (eds), From Topology to Computation, Proceedings of the Smalefest (New York and Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag), pp. 147–61.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1993d) ‘Intersecting Families of Sets and the Topology of Cones in Economics’, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 29, pp. 189–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1994) ‘Limited Arbitrage, Gains from Trade and Social Diversity: A Unified Perspective on Resource Allocation’, American Economic Review, vol. 84, pp. 427–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1995a) ‘Limited Arbitrage is Necessary and Sufficient for the Existence of a Competitive Equilibrium With or Without Short Sales’, discussion paper no. 650, Columbia University, New York and Economic Theory, vol. 5, pp. 79–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1995b) ‘A Unified Perspective and Resource Allocation: Limited Arbitrage is Necessary and Sufficient for the Existence of a Competitive Equilibrium, the Core and Social Choice’, CORE Discussion Paper, no. 9527, Univérsité Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1996a) ‘Limited Arbitrage is Necessary and Sufficient for the Nonemptiness of the Core’, Economic Letters, vol. 52, pp. 177–86, previously published as ‘Limited Arbitrage is Necessary and Sufficient for the Existence of a Competitive Equilibrium and the Core and it Limits Voting Cycles’, Economic Letters, vol. 46, pp. 321–31, an issue subsequently reprinted without the paper.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1996b) ‘A Topological Invariant for Competitive Markets’, working paper, Columbia University, New York, forthcoming in Journal of Mathematical Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1996c) ‘Limited Arbitrage is Necessary and Sufficient for the Existence of a Competitive Equilibrium’, Journal of Mathematical Economics, December.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1996d) ‘Topology and Invertible Maps’, working paper, Columbia University, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1996e) ‘Limited Arbitrage and Uniqueness of Equilibrium in Strictly Regular Economies’, working paper, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. (1996f) ‘Markets and Games: A Simple Equivalence among the Core, Equilibrium and Limited Arbitrage’, Metroeconomica, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 266–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. and Heal, G. M. (1983) ‘Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for a Resolution of the Social Choice Paradox’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 31, pp. 68–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. and Heal, G. M. (1992) ‘Arbitrage and Equilibrium in Sobolev Spaces, First Boston Working Paper, Columbia University, revised as ‘Equilibrium and the Core with Finitely or Infinitely Many Markets: A Unified Approach’, forthcoming in Economic Theory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. and Heal, G. M. (1993) ‘Existence of a Competitive Equilibrium in Sobolev Spaces without Bounds on Short Sales’, IMA Preprint series, 79, Institute for Mathematics and its Applications, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (June 1984), and Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 59, pp. 364–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. and Kalman, P. J. (1980) ‘Application of Functional Analysis to the Efficient Allocation of Economic Resources’, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debreu, G. (1959) The Theory of Value (New York: John Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Debreu, G. (1962) ‘New Concepts and Techniques in Equilibrium Analysis’, International Economic Review, vol. 3, pp. 257–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandmont, J.-M. (1982) ‘Temporary Equilibrium’, in Arrow, K. and Intriligator, M. D. (eds), Handbook of Mathematical Economics (New York: North-Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, J. (1973) ‘Temporary Equilibrium in a Sequential Trading Model with Spot and Futures Transactions’, Econometrica, vol. 41, pp. 1103–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, P. J. (1983) ‘Overlapping Expectations and Hart’s Conditions for Equilibrium in a Securities Market’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 31, pp. 170–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O. (1974) ‘Existence of Equilibrium in a Securities Model’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 9, pp, 293–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heal, G. M. (1983) ‘Contractibility and Public Decision Making’, in Pattanaik, P. K. and Salles, S. (eds), Social Choice and Welfare (New York: North-Holland), Chapter 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koutsougeras, L. (1983) ‘The Core in Two-stage Games’, working paper, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreps, D. (1981) ‘Arbitrage and Equilibrium in Economies with Infinitely Many Commodities’, Journal of Mathematical Economics, vol. 8, pp. 15–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Van, A. (1996) ‘Complete Characterization of Yannelis-Zame and Chichilnisky-Kalman-Mas Colell Properness Conditions on Preferences for Separable Concave Functions Defined on \(L_ + ^p\) and Lp’, Economic Theory, vol. 8, pp. 155–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie, L. (1959) ‘On the Existence of a General Equilibrium for Competitive Markets’, Econometrica, vol. 27, pp. 54–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie, L. (1987) ‘General Equilibrium’ in Eatwell, J., Milgate, M. and Newman, P. (eds), General Equilibrium, The New Palgrave (New York: Norton).

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie, L. (1961) ‘On the Existence of General Equilibrium: Some Corrections’, Econometrica, vol. 29, pp. 247–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monteiro, P., Page, F. and Wooders, M. (1996) ‘Arbitrage Equilibrium and Gains From Trade: A Counterexample’, forthcoming in Journal of Mathematical Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Negishi, T. (1960) ‘Welfare Economics and the Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy’, Metroeconomica, vol. 2, pp. 92–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, L. 1989) ‘Asset Market Equilibrium with Short Selling’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 56, pp. 467–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, F. (1987) ‘Notes and Comments to the Editor: On Equilibrium in Hart’s Securities Exchange Model’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 41, pp. 392–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, F. (1996) ‘Arbitrage and Asset Prices’, forthcoming in Mathematical Social Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, F. and Wooders, M. (1994) ‘Arbitrage in Markets with Unbounded Short Sales: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Non-emptiness of the Core and Existence of Equilibrium’, working paper, no. 9409, University of Toronto, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spanier, E. (1979) Algebraic Topology (New York: McGraw-Hill).

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner, J. (1987) ‘Arbitrage and the Existence of Competitive Equilibrium’, Econometrica, vol. 55, pp. 1403–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia University, USA

    Graciela Chichilnisky

  2. UNESCO, USA

    Graciela Chichilnisky

Authors
  1. Graciela Chichilnisky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Stanford University, California, USA

    Kenneth J. Arrow

  2. Department of Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

    Amartya Sen

  3. Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, Japan

    Kotaro Suzumura

Copyright information

© 1997 International Economic Association

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chichilnisky, G. (1997). A Unified Perspective on Resource Allocation: Limited Arbitrage is Necessary and Sufficient for the Existence of a Competitive Equilibrium, the Core and Social Choice. In: Arrow, K.J., Sen, A., Suzumura, K. (eds) Social Choice Re-examined. International Economic Association Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25849-9_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation