General Equilibrium Theory (GE) scrutinizes the ability of markets to achieve efficient allocation of resources. Our main purpose is, in the framework to the GE to analyze, the possibility of design a mechanism enabling agents to make independent decisions compatible with social welfare. More...

In this paper we show that in a pure exchange economy where social weights and total resources are fixed there is no possibility to improve the social welfare by means of efficient reallocations of the resources. However, if social weights are not fixed but can be selected from a particular set,...

A stumbling block in the modelling of competitive markets with commodity and price spaces of infinite dimensions, arises from having positive cones with an empty interior. This issue precludes the use of tools of differential analysis, ranging from the definition of a derivative, to the use of...

In this paper we show the strong relation existing between efficiency and social welfare. We introduce the concept of Negishi path, a differentiable manifold that shows the relation between distributions of social weights and efficient allocations. We show that it is possible to assign to each...

In the framework of general equilibrium theory, this paper considers the existing relationship between the concepts of egalitarianism, efficiency and fairness, in a pure exchange economy with infinitely many goods. We consider the possibility of achieving an efficient egalitarian allocation in a...

This paper surveys the main contributions of Amartya Sen in the fields of social choice theory, income distribution, and measurement of poverty. His empirical studies on famine and his discussion of the fundamental themes of rational choice are also commented on. A recurring theme in Sen's work...

We claim that economic agents driven by imitative behavior may impact the industrial specialization of national economies. We use a simple two-country model, where workers and firms decide to be skilled (or unskilled) and innovative (or non-innovative). We show that comparative advantages and...