From weakest-link to best-shot: Correction
From weakest-link to best-shot: Correction
复制标题
从最薄弱环节到最佳镜头：修正
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1985
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Hirshleifer
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Hirshleifer
这里，X是在一个由I个人组成的社区中社会可获得的公共物品的数量，而xi代表个人i的贡献（i = 1，...，（一）。在这种最弱链接的情况下，对于两个个体A和B，各自的偏好图在450线的西北方向呈现出截然不同的形状（其中xA x B）。特别是，A永远不会考虑在西北地区以外的地区经营，而B总是选择在东南地区。我应该注意到A的无差异曲线在其相关区域内必须是严格垂直的，而B的无差异曲线在其相关区域内必须是严格水平的。（在每一种情况下，都确实存在一定程度的弯曲，但只是在不相关的区域。）这里的图表只显示了相关区域的无差异曲线，是对原论文中图2的修正。在修正后的图表中，对于个体A，存在一条最佳垂直无差异曲线UA，它与A愿意贡献的最大xA相关联，而不管B的产量可能大多少。因此，A的反作用曲线RA从原点沿沿着450线延伸到点F，然后沿垂直UA沿着延伸。同样，对于B，他的反应曲线RB从原点到450线上的G点，然后沿着他的最佳无差异曲线是水平的UB。与原始论文的论点一致，平衡将在反应曲线沿着450线点F彼此重叠的范围的上限处。F点和G点之间的范围就像一条“合同曲线”，其中一方只能以牺牲
Here X is the socially available amount of the public good in a community of I individuals, while xi represents the contribution of individual i (i = 1, ..., I). In this Weakest-link situation, for two individuals A and B, the respective preference maps take on drastically different shapes northwest of the 450 line (where xA xB). In particular, A will never contemplate operating outside the northwest region, while B will always choose to be in the southeast region. I should have noticed that A's indifference curves must be strictly vertical in his relevant region, while B's must be strictly horizontal in his relevant region. (A degree of curvature does exist, in each case, but only in the nonrelevant region.) The diagram here, showing only the indifference curves in the relevant regions, is a corrected version of Figure 2 in the original paper. In the corrected diagram there is a best vertical indifference curve for individual A, UA, associated with the maximum xA that A would ever be willing to contribute regardless of how much greater B's production may be. Consequently, A's Reaction Curve RA runs from the origin to point F along the 450 line, and thenceforth along the vertical UA. For B similarly, his Reaction Curve RB runs from the origin to point G on the 450 line, and thenceforth along his best indifference curve the horizontal UB. Consistent with the argument of the original paper, the equilibrium will be at the upper limit of the range where the Reaction Curves overlie one another along the 450 line point F. The range between points F and G is like a 'contract curve' in that one party can gain only at the expense of