The measurable structure of an exchange economy includes measurability of consumers' preference relations: in particular, for each rational vector , the set
is measurable. Continuity of each individual's preference relation alone would not imply this across-consumer requirement. We use this usual measurability convention explicitly.
There are only countably many vectors in . Remove all the null sets that have zero measure, obtaining
Let . Equivalently, is the union over of the rational strict-improvement directions available to consumer . This choice of ensures that a direction available to even one consumer in is available to a positive-measure group.
We claim that . Otherwise, take finitely many and positive weights with and . Choose so small that . We can choose disjoint measurable sets with . Indeed, after the earlier choices remove at most mass, the remaining portion of has mass greater than . The scalar case of the Lyapunov convexity theorem, applied to its restricted atomless measure, realizes every mass between zero and its total, including .
Now change to on and leave it unchanged elsewhere. Every changed bundle is a feasible consumption bundle and is strictly preferred by its recipient. This new consumption allocation remains integrable, and
Thus is exactly feasible and improves a group of total mass , contradicting Pareto efficiency. Notice that no individual's consumption bundles were averaged: an atomless measure allows different small cohorts to make different improvements. Individual convexity of the preference relations is unnecessary.
If is nonempty, separate its convex hull from zero using the supporting hyperplane theorem. There exists with for every . Only weak separation is needed, so it is harmless if zero belongs to the closure of this convex hull.
Fix any and any . Completeness and continuity make the strictly preferred set relatively open in . Approximate by rational vectors for which is feasible and still strictly preferred. At a zero consumption coordinate, choose the rational approximations from the feasible side. Then implies , and passage to the limit gives . The same full-measure set works for all such bundles , not merely for each bundle separately.
If is empty, the same rational approximation argument says that consumers in have no strictly preferred feasible bundles at all. In that case any nonzero satisfies the required implication. In either case,
To see why transfers cannot simply be omitted, give all consumers endowment and utility function . Allocate to half of them and to the other half. This is Pareto efficient, since any Pareto improvement would increase the integral of utility while aggregate resources fix it. At these interior bundles the support inequalities force : directions arbitrarily close to force equality, and strict increases force positivity. The poorer half then receives less wealth than the original endowment supplies and has a cheaper strict improvement within its original budget. The support theorem concerns the redistributed budget, as defined in part (b).