Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-vmslq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-22T21:52:48.963Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Market Resolution and Valuation in Incomplete Markets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Kose John
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Arrow-Debreu approach to general equilibrium in an economy has been recognized as one of the most general and conceptually elegant frameworks for the study of financial problems under uncertainty [2], [9]. Equally well known is its elusiveness when it comes to ready application to practical problems (like capital budgeting) or empirical testing. (See [6], [15]–[18].) However, some recent research (see [1], [3], [6], [12]–[16], [18], and [19]) has made a serious attempt to put the state-preference theoretic model in an operational setting. Breeden and Litzenberger [6] have developed an interesting approach to derive constructively the prices of elementary Arrow-Debreu securities from the prices of call options on aggregate consumption. Banz and Miller [3] use a similar technique to value capital budgeting projects based on values for state-contingent claims computed from prices of call options written on the market portfolio. The “supershare” securities proposed by Hakansson [14]–[16] and related work by Garman [13], Ross [24], etc., have also served to give the so-called “state-contingent” approach a practical flavor.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , March 1984 , pp. 29 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

[1]Arditti, F. D., and John, K.. “Spanning the State Space with Options.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 15 (03 1980), pp. 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Arrow, K. J. “The Role of Securities in the Optimal Allocation of Risk-Bearing.” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 31 (1963–1964), pp. 91–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Banz, R. W., and Miller, M. H.. “Prices for State-Contingent Claims: Some Estimates and Application.” Journal of Business, Vol. 51 (10 1978), pp. 653–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Black, F. “The Pricing of Complex Options and Corporate Liabilities.” Mimeographed. Chicago: University of Chicago (1974).Google Scholar
[5]Black, F., and Scholes, M.. “The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities.” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 81 (05/06 1973), pp. 637–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Breeden, D. T., and Litzenberger, R. H.. “Prices of State-Contingent Claims Implicit in Option Prices.” Journal of Business, Vol. 51 (10 1978), pp. 621–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Brennan, M. J. “The Pricing of Contingent Claims in Discrete Time Models.” The Journal of Finance, Vol. 2 (03 1979), pp. 53–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Brennan, M. J., and Solanki, R.. ”Optimal Portfolio Insurance.” Working Paper No. 666, Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration, University of British Columbia (1979).Google Scholar
[9]Debreu, G.Theory of Value. New Haven and London: Yale University Press (1959).Google Scholar
[10]Ekern, S., and Wilson, R. B.. “On the Theory of the Firm in an Economy with Incomplete Markets.” The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Vol. 5 (Spring 1974), pp. 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Friesen, P. H. “A Reinterpretation of the Equilibrium Theory of Arrow and Debreu in Terms of Financial Markets.” Technical Report No. 126, Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences, Stanford University (1974).Google Scholar
[12]Friesen, P. H. “The Arrow-Debreu Model Extended to Financial Markets.” Econometrica, Vol. 47 (05 1979), pp. 689–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Garman, M. B. “The Pricing of Supershares.” Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 6 (03 1978), pp. 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Hakansson, N. H. “The Purchasing Power Fund: A New Kind of Financial Intermediary.” Financial Analysts Journal, Vol. 32 (11/12 1976), pp. 2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Hakansson, N. H. “Efficient Paths Toward Efficient Capital Markets in Large and Small Countries.” In Financial Decision Making under Uncertainty, Levy, H. and Sarnat, M., eds. New York: Academic Press (1977).Google Scholar
[16]Hakansson, N. H. “Welfare Aspects of Options and Supershares.” The Journal of Finance, Vol. 35 (06 1978), pp. 759–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Hirshleiffer, J. H.Investment, Interest and Capital. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall (1974).Google Scholar
[18]John, K. “Efficient Funds in Financial Markets with Options: A New Irrelevance Proposition.” The Journal of Finance, Vol. 37 (06 1981), pp. 685–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]Kreps, D. M. “Multiperiod Securities and the Efficient Allocation of Risk: A Comment on the Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model.” In The Economics of Information and Uncertainty, McCall, J. J., ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (1982).Google Scholar
[20]Hart, O. D. “On the Existence of Equilibrium in a Securities Model.” Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 9 (04 1975), pp. 293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21]Hart, O. D. “On the Optimality of Equilibrium When the Market Structure is Incomplete.” Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 11 (12 1975), pp. 418–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22]Radner, R. “Competitive Equilibrium under Uncertainty.” Econometrica, Vol. 36 (01 1968), pp. 31–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23]Radner, R. “A Note on Unanimity of Stockholders' Preferences among Alternative Production Plans: A Reformulation of the Ekern-Wilson Model.” The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Vol. 5 (Spring 1974), pp. 181–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[24]Ross, S. A. “Options and Efficiency.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 90 (02 1976), pp. 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[25]Royden, H. L.Real Analysis, 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan (1968).Google Scholar
[26]Satterthwaite, M. A. “On the Scope of the Stockholder Unanimity Theorems.” International Economic Review, Vol. 22 (02 1981), pp. 119–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar