IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iim/iimawp/wp01681.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Axiomatic Analysis of Choosing The Second Best

Author

Listed:
  • Lahiri Somdeb

Abstract

The dominant theme in decision theory has been the one where an agent chooses what is perceived to be the best outcome out of a (finite) set of outcomes. This has been the model that economic theory has traditionally favored. In a paper by Baigent and Gaertner (1996) we find a departure from this theme. It is argued there that if there is a unique best outcome then often one may forgo one’s claim to it out of politeness. A similar consideration is that of altruism which manifests itself in similar behavior. However, can there be no other type of consideration which prompts one to judiciously avoid the best? In this paper we provide two axiomatic characterizations of the decision rule which invariably selects the second best alternative. Unlike Baigent and Gaertner (1996) we restrict ourselves to the situation where no two alternatives share the same rank.

Suggested Citation

  • Lahiri Somdeb, 2000. "Axiomatic Analysis of Choosing The Second Best," IIMA Working Papers WP2000-05-04, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:iim:iimawp:wp01681
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:iim:iimawp:wp01681. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eciimin.html .

    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.