Kenneth J. Arrow

Bio: Kenneth J. Arrow is an academic researcher from Stanford University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Social choice theory & General equilibrium theory. The author has an hindex of 113, co-authored 411 publications receiving 111221 citations. Previous affiliations of Kenneth J. Arrow include University of California & Princeton University.

Reflections on the Essays

Abstract: That my work has helped to motivate such a considerable number of excellent studies, queries, and even criticisms is a source of considerable satisfaction. A full set of comments would occupy more space than would be appropriate to the occasion. I will confine myself to scattered thoughts stimulated by reading the chapters that deal with impersonal scholarly issues. The reader of the chapters that deal with me more personally should I think be spared the refraction imposed by any comments I might make. I follow the grouping of chapters in the book.

Sustainability and the measurement of wealth: further reflections

Abstract: The June 2012 issue of Environment and Development Economics published a symposium with considerable focus on our paper, ‘Sustainability and the measurement of wealth’. The Symposium also contained five articles in which other researchers offered valuable comments on our paper. The present note replies to those comments. It clarifies important issues and reveals how important questions relating to sustainability analysis can be fruitfully addressed within our framework. These include questions about the treatment of time, the use of shadow prices and the treatment of transnational externalities. This note also offers new theoretical results that help substantiate our earlier empirical finding that the value of human health is something very different from the value of the consumption permitted by health and survival.

Sustainability and the Measurement of Wealth

Abstract: The last two decades have witnessed growing concern that the pattern of economic growth in many countries is not sustainable because of the depletion in stocks of many natural resources and the deterioration in the quality of various environmental services. These concerns have helped spawn a growing literature on 'sustainable development.' This emerging literature expands traditional growth-accounting approaches by giving considerable attention to natural resource stocks and environmental quality. This paper aims to advance this literature. We extend earlier work by offering a fully consistent theoretical framework that offers a clear criterion for sustainable development. This framework yields an empirically implementable measure of whether a given national economy is following a sustainable path. We apply this framework to five countries that differ significantly in terms of their stages of development and resource bases: the United States, China, Brazil, India, and Venezuela.

The Demand for Information and the Distribution of Income.

Abstract: : The income of an individual is the sum of income derived from the sale of labor and income derived from the return on wealth. The increment of wealth in any period is the excess of total income over consumption. Therefore, the inequality of income among the members of a population depends at a moment of time on the inequality in labor income, the inequality in property income, and the covariance between them. However, the inequality in the holdings of wealth is to some extent derived from the inequality in past labor income. This paper takes the inequality in labor income as a fact. However, it is well known that the inequality in property income is considerably greater proportionately. It would be natural to assume that saving (excess of income over consumption) is proportional to income. In that case, if it is assumed that labor income comes first, the inequality in wealth should be equal to the inequality in income. Wealth and income are closely related, in that those with high incomes tend to be those with large accomulations of property. But the relation is far from linear. It is well known that the proportion of wealth held by the high income recipients is much higher proportion of income that they receive.

Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk

Abstract: This paper presents a critique of expected utility theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk, and develops an alternative model, called prospect theory. Choices among risky prospects exhibit several pervasive effects that are inconsistent with the basic tenets of utility theory. In particular, people underweight outcomes that are merely probable in comparison with outcomes that are obtained with certainty. This tendency, called the certainty effect, contributes to risk aversion in choices involving sure gains and to risk seeking in choices involving sure losses. In addition, people generally discard components that are shared by all prospects under consideration. This tendency, called the isolation effect, leads to inconsistent preferences when the same choice is presented in different forms. An alternative theory of choice is developed, in which value is assigned to gains and losses rather than to final assets and in which probabilities are replaced by decision weights. The value function is normally concave for gains, commonly convex for losses, and is generally steeper for losses than for gains. Decision weights are generally lower than the corresponding probabilities, except in the range of low prob- abilities. Overweighting of low probabilities may contribute to the attractiveness of both insurance and gambling. EXPECTED UTILITY THEORY has dominated the analysis of decision making under risk. It has been generally accepted as a normative model of rational choice (24), and widely applied as a descriptive model of economic behavior, e.g. (15, 4). Thus, it is assumed that all reasonable people would wish to obey the axioms of the theory (47, 36), and that most people actually do, most of the time. The present paper describes several classes of choice problems in which preferences systematically violate the axioms of expected utility theory. In the light of these observations we argue that utility theory, as it is commonly interpreted and applied, is not an adequate descriptive model and we propose an alternative account of choice under risk. 2. CRITIQUE

Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation

Abstract: In this paper, we argue that the ability of a firm to recognize the value of new, external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends is critical to its innovative capabilities. We label this capability a firm's absorptive capacity and suggest that it is largely a function of the firm's level of prior related knowledge. The discussion focuses first on the cognitive basis for an individual's absorptive capacity including, in particular, prior related knowledge and diversity of background. We then characterize the factors that influence absorptive capacity at the organizational level, how an organization's absorptive capacity differs from that of its individual members, and the role of diversity of expertise within an organization. We argue that the development of absorptive capacity, and, in turn, innovative performance are history- or path-dependent and argue how lack of investment in an area of expertise early on may foreclose the future development of a technical capability in that area. We formulate a model of firm investment in research and development (R&D), in which R&D contributes to a firm's absorptive capacity, and test predictions relating a firm's investment in R&D to the knowledge underlying technical change within an industry. Discussion focuses on the implications of absorptive capacity for the analysis of other related innovative activities, including basic research, the adoption and diffusion of innovations, and decisions to participate in cooperative R&D ventures. **

Dynamic capabilities and strategic management

Abstract: The dynamic capabilities framework analyzes the sources and methods of wealth creation and capture by private enterprise firms operating in environments of rapid technological change. The competitive advantage of firms is seen as resting on distinctive processes (ways of coordinating and combining), shaped by the firm's (specific) asset positions (such as the firm's portfolio of difftcult-to- trade knowledge assets and complementary assets), and the evolution path(s) it has aflopted or inherited. The importance of path dependencies is amplified where conditions of increasing retums exist. Whether and how a firm's competitive advantage is eroded depends on the stability of market demand, and the ease of replicability (expanding intemally) and imitatability (replication by competitors). If correct, the framework suggests that private wealth creation in regimes of rapid technological change depends in large measure on honing intemal technological, organizational, and managerial processes inside the firm. In short, identifying new opportunities and organizing effectively and efficiently to embrace them are generally more fundamental to private wealth creation than is strategizing, if by strategizing one means engaging in business conduct that keeps competitors off balance, raises rival's costs, and excludes new entrants. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.