It is widely thought that incomes risks can be shared by trading infinancial assets. But financial assets typically carry some riskidiosyncratic to them, hence, disposing incomes risk using financial assetswill involve buying into the inherent idiosyncratic risk. However, standardtheory argues...

The final step in the proof of Proposition 1 (p.311) of Mukerji and Tallon (2003) may not hold in generalbecause $\varepsilon0$ in the proof cannot be chosen independently of $w,z$. We point out by a counterexample that the axioms they impose are too weak for Proposition 1. We introduce a...

This paper analyzes optimal wage contracting assuming agents are not subjective expectedutility maximizers but are, instead, ambiguity (or uncertainty) averse decision makers whomaximize Choquet expected utility. We show that such agents will choose not to include anyindexation coverage in their...

This paper assesses the quantitative impact of ambiguity on the historically observed financial asset returns and prices. The single agent, in a dynamic exchange economy, treats uncertainty about the conditional mean of the probability distribution on consumption and dividends in the next period...

This paper assesses the quantitative impact of ambiguity on the historically observed financial asset returns and prices. The single agent, in a dynamic exchange economy, treats the conditional uncertainty about the consumption and dividends next period as ambiguous. We calibrate the agent's...

This paper analyzes optimal wage contracting assuming agents are not subjective expectedutility maximizers but are, instead, ambiguity (or uncertainty) averse decision makers whomaximize Choquet expected utility. We show that such agents will choose not to include anyindexation coverage in their...

It is widely thought that incomes risks can be shared by trading infinancial assets. But financial assets typically carry some riskidiosyncratic to them, hence, disposing incomes risk using financial assetswill involve buying into the inherent idiosyncratic risk. However, standardtheory argues...

The final step in the proof of Proposition 1 (p.311) of Mukerji and Tallon (2003) may not hold in generalbecause $\varepsilon0$ in the proof cannot be chosen independently of $w,z$. We point out by a counterexample that the axioms they impose are too weak for Proposition 1. We introduce a...