The name is absent



Proof of Lemma 3. a. Without loss of generality we can take n = 0. Let {xt,at}, t = 0,... be optimal from
y0 = y. Suppose at = 0 for all t and xt = yt = ft(y). It follows that for all y e (0,K), ft(y) e (0,K), ft(y) > y,
and ftx(y) ≥ fx(K)t for all t ≥ 1. Consider

an alternative sequence {χt,at} where ao = ɛ and at = 0 for all t ≥ 1. Then xt = yt = ft(y-ε) for all t ≥ 1. As
{xt,at} is optimal,

0≥


∞

∑ δt {c(0,ft(y)) +D(ft(y))}
t=0


∞

C(ε,y) + D(y-ε) + ∑ δt {c(0,ft(y -ε))+D(ft(y-ε))}
t=1

∞∞

= C(0,y) - C(ε, y) + ∑ δt [c(0, ft (y)) - C(0, ft (y - ε)) ] + ɪ δt [ D(ft (y)) - D(ft (y-ε)) ].

t=1                                              t=0

∞

Dividing by ɛ and letting ε→0 implies: Ca(0,y) ≥ Dx(y) + ∑ δt [Cy(0,ft(y)) + Dχ(ft(y))ɔf3t(y).

t=1

Since Cy(0,ft(y)) = 0 this contradicts the condition of the proposition. Thus, there must exist some t for
which at > 0.

b. Let a0 denote the control that minimizes the sum of one-period control costs and damages. The
assumption Ca(0,y) < Dx(y) implies a0 > 0. Let a* denote an optimal control for the infinite horizon
problem. From the definition of a0, C(a0,y) + D(y-a0) ≤ C(a*,y) + D(y-a*), with a strict inequality if a* =
0. Further, if a* < a0, then V(f(y-a*)) ≥ V(f(y-a0)) by Lemma 1. From these inequalities it must be that
a* ≥ a0 > 0, else a* could not be optimal in the infinite horizon problem.

c. Since infa Ca(a,f(y)) + Cy(a,f(y)) ≤ Ca(0,f(y)) + Cy(0,f(y)) = Ca(0,f(y)) it follows from the condition in
part b that Ca(0,y) < Dx(y) + δCa(0,f(y))fχ(y) for all y. Since the condition is part c holds for all y,
Ca(0,f(y)) < Dχ(f(y)) + δ[infa {Ca(a,f2(y)) + Cy(a,f2(y))}]fχ(f(y)). Substituting this in the previous
inequality yields Ca(0,y) < Dχ(y) + δ[Dχ(f(y)) + δ[infa {Ca(a,f2(y)) + Cy(a,f2(y))}]fχ(f(y))]fχ(y). Iterating
forward and repeating a similar substitution yields Ca(0,y) < Dx(y) +

23



More intriguing information

1. The geography of collaborative knowledge production: entropy techniques and results for the European Union
2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. The name is absent
5. Improvements in medical care and technology and reductions in traffic-related fatalities in Great Britain
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. DISCRIMINATORY APPROACH TO AUDITORY STIMULI IN GUINEA FOWL (NUMIDA MELEAGRIS) AFTER HYPERSTRIATAL∕HIPPOCAMP- AL BRAIN DAMAGE
9. LABOR POLICY AND THE OVER-ALL ECONOMY
10. The name is absent