Encyclopedia of Law and Economics

Living Edition
| Editors: Alain Marciano, Giovanni Battista Ramello

Equilibrium Theory

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7883-6_35-1

Abstract

Equilibrium is a key concept of modern science, from classical mechanics to biology, so that its importance for economics should not be a surprise. More surprising is perhaps its central role in the tentative transition of economics from an essentially institutional set of disciplines to a unified branch of modern science, based on a rigorously axiomatic system. The main attempt for such a transition, which has as protagonists several Nobel prizes, was consumed in the 1950s, in an atmosphere first of elation and then of disillusion that appears very similar to that experienced 20 years earlier by mathematicians because of the failure of the Hilbert unification program. In spite of the somewhat spectacular nature of both successes and failures of its mathematical theory, however, general equilibrium has a central role in the history of modern economics that goes much beyond its formal treatment. This role is inextricably related to the notion of the market and is perhaps the primary constituents of the eclectic nature and vitality of contemporary economics.

Keywords

Sugar Corn Income Coherence Nash 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Arrow KJ (1951) An extension of the basic theorems of classical welfare economics. In: Neyman J (ed.), Proceedings of the second Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  2. Arrow KJ, Debreu G (1954) Existence of an equilibrium for a competitive economy. Econometrica 22(3):265–290. doi:10.2307/1907353. doi:10.2307 %2 F1907353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergson A (1938) A reformulation of certain aspects of welfare economics. Q J Econ 310–334Google Scholar
  4. Cantillon R (1755) Essai sur La Nature de Commerce en Géneral (ed: Hibbs H). Macmillan, London, 1931Google Scholar
  5. Colander D (1995) Marshallian general equilibrium analysis. East Econ J 21(3)Google Scholar
  6. Debreu G (1951) The coefficient of resource utilization. Econometrica 19(3):273–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Debreu G (1974) Excess-demand functions. J Math Econ 1:15–21. doi:10.1016/0304-4068(74)90032-9. doi:10.1016 %2 F0304-4068 %2874 %2990032-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Devarajan S, Go D, Lewis J, Robinson S, Sinko P (1997) Simple general equilibrium modeling. In: Francois J, Reinert K (eds) Applied methods for trade policy analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  9. Kirzner IM (1973) Discovery capitalism and distributive justice (Oxford 1989)Google Scholar
  10. Mantel R (1974) On the characterization of aggregate excess-demand. J Econ Theor 7:348–353. doi:10.1016/0022-0531(74)90100-8. doi:10.1016 %2 F0022-0531 %2874 %2990100-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McKenzie LW (1959) On the existence of general equilibrium for a competitive economy. Econometrica 27(1):54–71. JSTOR 1907777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nash JF Jr (1950) Equilibrium points in n-person games. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 36:48–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nash JF Jr (1951) Non-cooperative games. Ann Math 54:286–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Norton R, Scandizzo PL (1981) General equilibrium computations in activity analysis models. Oper Res 29(2):243–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pareto V (1909) Manual of political economy (Trans: Kelley AM). New York 1971Google Scholar
  16. Ricardo D (1821) On the principles of political economy an taxation, 3rd edn (ed 1821). John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. Robinson J (1962) Economic philosophy. Transaction PublisherGoogle Scholar
  18. Scarf HE, Hansen T (1973) The computation of economic equilibria, vol 24, Cowles Foundation for Research in economics at Yale University, Monograph. Yale University Press, New Haven/LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Sonnenschein H (1972) Market excess-demand functions. Econometrica (The Econometric Society) 40(3): 549–563. doi:10.2307/1913184. doi:10.2307 %2 F1913184. JSTOR 1913184Google Scholar
  20. Sonnenschein H (1973) Do Walras’ identity and continuity characterize the class of community excess-demand functions? J Econ Theor 6:345–354. doi:10.1016/0022-0531(73)90066-5. doi:10.1016 %2 F0022-0531 %2873 %2990066-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stone R, Brown A (1962) A computable model for economic growth. Cambridge Growth Project, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  22. Veblen T (1904) The theory of business enterprise. Scribner New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Walbroeck JL, Ginsburg VA (1981) Activity analysis and general equilibrium modelling. North Holland Publishing, Amsterdam, Webley, O. 1986Google Scholar
  24. Walras L (1954) Éléments d’économic politique pure, elements of pure economics (trans: William Jaffé from the 1926 ed). Richard D. Irwin, HomewoodGoogle Scholar
  25. Warlas L (1877b) Éléments d’économic politique pure, 2nd part Ist ed. L.Cobraz, LausanneGoogle Scholar
  26. Wicksteed PH (1914) The scope and method of political economy in the light of the “marginal” theory of value and of distribution. Econ J 1–23Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CEIS (Centre for International Economic Studies)University of Rome “Tor Vergata”RomeItaly