IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/ecnphi/v25y2009i03p303-334_99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coping Rationally With Ambiguity: Robustness Versus Ambiguity-Aversion

Author

Listed:
  • Nehring, Klaus

Abstract

Al-Najjar and Weinstein (2009) argue that the extant literature on ambiguity aversion is not successful in accounting for Ellsberg choices as rational responses to ambiguity. We concur, and propose that rational choice under ambiguity aims at robustness rather than avoidance of ambiguity. A central argument explains why robust choice is intrinsically context-dependent and legitimately violates standard choice consistency conditions. If choice consistency is forced, however, ambiguity-aversion emerges as a semi-rational response to ambiguity.

Suggested Citation

  • Nehring, Klaus, 2009. "Coping Rationally With Ambiguity: Robustness Versus Ambiguity-Aversion," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 303-334, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:ecnphi:v:25:y:2009:i:03:p:303-334_99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266267109990265/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bradley, Richard, 2024. "Catastrophe insurance decision making when the science is uncertain," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122508, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Aldred, Jonathan, 2013. "Justifying precautionary policies: Incommensurability and uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 132-140.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:ecnphi:v:25:y:2009:i:03:p:303-334_99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/eap .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.