Abstract:
This paper analyzes a society composed of individuals who have diverse
sets of beliefs (or models) and diverse tastes (or utility functions).
It characterizes the model selection process of a social planner who
wishes to aggregate individuals' beliefs and tastes but is concerned
that their beliefs are misspecified (or distorted). A novel
impossibility result emerges: a utilitarian social planner who seeks
robustness to misspecification never aggregates individuals' beliefs but
instead behaves systematically as a dictator by selecting a single
individual's belief. This tension between robustness and aggregation
exists because aggregation yields policy-contingent beliefs, which are
very sensitive to policy outcomes. Restoring the possibility of belief
aggregation requires individuals to have heterogeneous tastes and some
common beliefs. This analysis reveals that misspecification has
significant economic implications for welfare aggregation. These
implications are illustrated in treatment choice, asset pricing, and
dynamic macroeconomics.
To obtain the Zoom link, please subscribe to the Seminar Mailing List, or contact one of the organisers.
Reminder: On the seminar website
you can find the video recordings, slides and supplementary materials
for all past presentations, as well as information about future
presentations.