Abstract
The concept of convexity plays an important role in the studies of economics in general and consumer theory in particular. By removing the unrealistic assumption that consumer preferences are complete on the set X of consumption choices, this chapter, which is mainly based on Forrest et al. (Studia Universitatis “Vasile Goldis” Arad—Economics Series, 2023), examines how the various concepts of convex preferences and relevant properties can be reestablished. Different from the literature, this chapter derives a series of formal propositions and constructs counterexamples. Among others, it shows the following: (1) The weighted combination of two possible consumptions is not necessarily comparable with any of the possibilities; (2) not every convergent sequence of a consumer’s preferable consumptions asymptotically preserves his preference preordering; (3) not all preferences satisfy either positive multiplicativity or additive conservation; (4) all three types of preference convexities—weak convexity, convexity, and strong convexity—can be introduced to general convex spaces. In the conclusion section, some research topics of expected significance are suggested for future works.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alonso, S., Herrera-Viedma, E., Chiclana, F., & Herrera, F. (2010). A web-based consensus support system for group decision making problems and incomplete preferences. Information Sciences, 180(23), 4477–4495.
Aumann, R. (1962). Utility theory without the completeness axiom. Econometrica, 30, 445–462.
Bewley, T. (1986). Knightian uncertainty theory: Part I. Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No. 807.
Brandl, F., & Brandt, F. (2020). Arrovian aggregation of convex preferences. Econometrica, 88(2), 799–844.
Cardin, M. (2019). Convex preferences as aggregation of orderings. In Proceedings of the 11th conference of the European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology (Vol. 1, pp. 792–796).
Cardin, M. (2022). Convex preferences: An abstract approach. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 446, 233–242.
Cettolin, E., & Riedl, A. (2019). Revealed preferences under uncertainty: Incomplete preferences and preferences for randomization. Journal of Economic Theory, 181(May), 547–585.
Chateauneuf, A., & Tallon, J. M. (2002). Diversification, convex preferences, and non-empty core in the Choquet expected utility model. Economic Theory, 19(3), 509–523.
Debreu, G. (1959). Theory of value: An axiomatic analysis of economic equilibrium. Yale University Press.
Dubra, J., & Ok, E. A. (2002). A model of procedural decision making in the presence of risk. International Economic Review, 43(4), 1053–1080.
Forrest, J. Y. L. (2013). A systemic perspective on cognition and mathematics. CRC Press, an Imprint of Taylor and Francis.
Forrest, J. Y. L., Tiglioglu, T., Liu, Y., Mong, D., & Cardin, M. (2023). Various convexities and some relevant properties of consumer preference relations. Studia Universitatis “Vasile Goldis” Arad—Economics Series, 33(4), 145–168. https://doi.org/10.2478/sues-2023-0021.
Halevy, Y., Persitz, D., & Zrill, L. (2017). Non-parametric bounds for non-convex preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 137(May), 105–112.
Hervés-Beloso, C., & Cruces, H. V. (2019). Continuous preference orderings representable by utility functions. Journal of Economic Surveys, 33(1), 179–194.
Hu, K., Tao, Y., Ma, Y., & Shi, L. (2021). Peer pressure induced punishment resolves social dilemma on interdependent networks. Scientific Reports, 11, 15792.
Jehle, G., & Reny, P. (2000). Advanced microeconomic theory (3rd ed.). Pearson.
Kubis, W. (1999). Abstract convex structures in topology and set theory. PhD thesis, University of Silesia.
Kuratowski, K., & Mostowski, A. (1976). Set theory: With an introduction to descriptive set theory. North-Holland.
Lin, Y. (2008). Systematic studies: The infinity problem in modern mathematics. Kybernetes: The International Journal of Cybernetics, Systems and Management Sciences, 37(3–4), 385–542.
Mandler, M. (1999). Incomplete preferences and rational intransitivity of choice. Mimeo. Harvard University.
Mani, A., Rahwan, I., & Pentland, A. (2013). Inducing peer pressure to promote cooperation. Scientific Reports, 3, 01735.
Mas-Collel, A., Whinston, M. D., & Green, J. R. (1995). Microeconomic theory. Oxford University Press.
Meng, F. Y., & Chen, X. H. (2015). A new method for group decision making with incomplete fuzzy preference relations. Knowledge-Based Systems, 73(January), 111–123.
Miller, N. H. (2006). Notes on microeconomic theory. Retrieved July 11, 2022, from https://nmiller.web.illinois.edu/notes.html.
Ok, E. A. (2002). Utility representation of an incomplete preference relation. Journal of Economic Theory, 104(2), 429–449.
Silberger, E. (2000). The structure of economics: A mathematical analysis (3rd ed.). Irwin McGraw Hill.
Simon, C. P., & Blume, L. E. (1994). Mathematics for economists. W.W. Norton.
van de Vel, M. L. J. (1993). Theory of convex structures. North-Holland mathematical library (Vol. 50). Elsevier.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Forrest, J.YL., Tiglioglu, T., Liu, Y., Mong, D., Cardin, M. (2023). Convexities of Consumption Preferences. In: Systemic Principles of Applied Economic Philosophies I. Translational Systems Sciences, vol 38. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7273-9_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7273-9_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-99-7272-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-99-7273-9
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)