Real estate and relative risk aversion with generalized recursive preferences

This paper investigates how real estate wealth affects the household’s attitude toward risk, and derives the closed-form expressions for risk aversion with generalized recursive preferences. We find three channels through which real estate wealth affects risk aversion, and these channels are absent in the traditional measure of relative risk aversion as in Arrow (1965) and Pratt (1964). First, illiquidity and fluctuations in real estate value increase consumption risk, thereby increasing risk aversion. Second, real estate as an asset provides a cushion for absorbing negative shocks to households, reducing risk aversion. Third, an increase in real estate prices lowers the profit of the firm that uses real estate as a factor of production, induces a decline in the real wage, and causes a rise in consumption risk. This channel increases risk aversion. We study how these channels as a whole determine relative risk aversion using a basic real business cycle model with generalized recursive preferences and compare the results with the case of expected utility preferences. Finally, we explore the implications of the firm’s and the household’s real estate holdings and illiquidity of real estate on the risk premiums for equity and real estate.     

Wealth effects and agency costs

We analyze how the agent's initial wealth affects the principal's expected profits in the standard principal–agent model with moral hazard.We show that if the principal prefers a poorer agent for all specifications of action sets, probability distributions, and disutility of effort, then the agent's utility of income must exhibit a coefficient of absolute prudence less than three times the coefficient of absolute risk aversion for all levels of income, thus strengthening the sufficiency result of Thiele and Wambach (1999). Also, we prove that there is no condition on the agent's utility of income alone that will make the principal prefer richer agents. Moreover, we show that, for an interesting class of problems, the principal prefers a relatively poorer agent if agent's wealth is sufficiently large. Finally, we discuss how alternative ways of modeling the agent's outside option affects the principal's preferences for agent's wealth.     

Output and wages with inequality averse agents

Abstract.  We analyse a two‐task work environment with risk‐neutral but inequality averse individuals. For the agent employed in task 2 effort is verifiable, while in task 1 it is not. Accordingly, agent 1 receives an incentive contract that, owing to his wealth constraint, leads to a rent that the other agent resents. We show that greater inequality aversion unambiguously decreases total output and therefore average labour productivity. More specifically, inequality aversion reduces effort, wage, and payoff of agent 1. Effects on wage and effort of agent 2 depend on whether effort levels across tasks are substitutes or complements in the firm's output function. JEL classification: D2, J3     

GRANTING AN EXIT OPTION TO CONDUCT AN AUDIT

We study a principal–agent relationship with auditing in which information from an audit is ‘soft’– by conducting an audit, the principal observes the agent's private information, but cannot obtain verifiable evidence on the information. Moreover, the principal's auditing effort is unverifiable in our model. Therefore, besides the agent's misreporting incentive, there is the principal's incentive to accuse the truthful agent even without auditing. If the principal's auditing effort is verifiable, granting no exit option to the agent is optimal although the principal can still accuse a truthful agent after the audit. We show that when the principal's auditing effort is unverifiable, granting an exit option to the agent and auditing are complementary. Without granting an exit option to the agent, no auditing is optimal, and the principal grants an exit option to conduct a sincere audit, which in turn mitigates the agent's misreporting incentive. Our analysis also reveals that, when the cost of auditing is sufficiently large, the principal conducts more sincere audits with a smaller amount of penalty.     

Bare promises: An experiment

Is truth-value of a statement what lying aversion is all about? We propose an experimental test and find only limited support. In this context with ‘bare promises’, we also test for guilt aversion and again find only limited support.     

Imperfect evaluation in project screening

This paper studies a model in which an agent considers proposing a project of unknown quality to an evaluator, who has to decide on whether or not to accept it. Earlier papers considered the case when the evaluation is perfect and showed than higher submission fees increase the expected quality of projects submitted for review by discouraging long-shot submissions. We examine the case of two-sided incomplete information where not only the agent’s, but also the evaluator’s assessment of the project is imperfect. We show that under this specification, an increase in the submission fee may lead to a decrease in the quality of projects that are implemented because of its adverse effects on the evaluator’s acceptance policy.     

Optimal hedge ratio under a subjective re-weighting of the original measure

In this article we study a risk-minimizing hedge ratio with futures contracts, where the risk of the hedged portfolio is measured through a spectral risk measure (SRM), thus incorporating the degree of agent’s risk aversion. We empirically estimate the optimal hedge ratio (OHR) using a long time series of UK and US equity indices, the EURUSD and EURGBP exchange rates and four liquid commodities (Brent crude oil, corn, gold and copper), to represent different asset classes. Comparing the results with common OHRs (such as the minimum variance and the minimum expected shortfall), we find that the agent’s risk aversion has a material impact, and should not be ignored in risk management.     

WHY DOES IT MATTER THAT BELIEFS AND VALUATIONS BE CORRECTLY REPRESENTED?*

This article contains an analysis of a simple principal–agent problem illustrating possible problems that may arise when the prinicpal ascribes to the agent subjective probabilities and utilities that are implied by the subjective expected utility model but do not represent the agent's beliefs and valuations. In particular, it is possible that an incentive contract designed by the principal induces the agent to choose an action that is not in the principal's best interest.     

The effect of ambiguity aversion on reward scheme choice

We test the implications of ambiguity aversion in a principal–agent problem with multiple agents. Models of ambiguity aversion suggest that, under ambiguity, comparative compensation schemes may become more attractive than independent wage contracts. We test this by presenting agents with a choice between comparative reward schemes and independent contracts, which are designed such that under uncertainty about output distributions (that is, under ambiguity), ambiguity averse agents should typically prefer comparative reward schemes, independent of their degree of risk aversion. We indeed find that the share of agents who choose the comparative scheme is higher under ambiguity.     

Competition and the reform of incentive schemes in the regulated sector

We consider a regulation problem with complete contracting in a principal–agent model with adverse selection and review within this model the various channels by which external competition parameters affect incentives within the regulated firm. The channels are: the principal’s information, the principal’s objective function, the agent’s incentive constraint, the agent’s participation constraint. We consider in particular a better information structure, a threat of liquidation, a fight for talent, a more efficient private sector, and the existence of better substitutes. We characterize in each case the conditions under which the effect on incentives is positive.     

SUBJECTIVE EVALUATION IN AGENCY CONTRACTS*

We study how a principal uses her subjective evaluation of the agent's performance in an incentive contract. It is shown that the subjective evaluation can be used either 1) when there is no other information about the agent's performance and the principal is able to discard money, or 2) when the principal chooses between wage payment based on subjective evaluation by foregoing objective evaluation, and the one based only on the objective evaluation and when the subjective evaluation is sufficiently accurate. The principal pays a high fixed wage when her rating at the subjective evaluation is above a certain level. On the other hand, when it is below that level, she either pays a low fixed wage or obtains objective evaluation and pays based on its outcome.     

Regulating a manager whose empire-building preferences are private information

We obtain the optimal contract for the government (principal) to regulate a manager (agent) who has a taste for empire-building that is his/her private information. This taste for empire-building is modeled as a utility premium that is proportional to the difference between the contracted output and a reference output. We find that output is distorted upward when the manager’s taste for running large firms is weak, downward when it is strong, and equals a reference output when it is intermediate (in this case, the participation constraint is binding). We also obtain an endogenous reference output (equal to the expected output, which depends on the reference output), and find that the response of output to cost is null in the short-run (in which the reference output is fixed), whenever the manager’s type is in the intermediate range, and negative in the long-run (after the adjustment of the reference output to equal expected output).     

Strategic obscurity in the forecasting of disasters

A principal acquires information about a shock and then discloses it to an agent. After the disclosure, the principal and agent each decide whether to take costly preparatory actions that yield mutual benefits but only when the shock strikes. The principal maximizes his expected payoff by ex ante committing to the quality of his information, and the disclosure rule. We show that even when the acquisition of perfect information is costless, the principal may optimally acquire imperfect information when his own action eliminates the agent's incentive to take action against the risk.     

A Moral Hazard Approach to Wage Discounts under Informal Hiring

This study discusses informal hiring in terms of a standard principal–agent model. We have developed an adverse selection model of the labour market where effort is not contractible and employers have the opportunity to use informal search channels for hiring purposes. This standard framework enables us to provide an effort‐based explanation of the wage gap associated with informal hiring. Besides the wage discount, another feature of the equilibrium is that low‐ability workers informally hired shirk.     

The effects of pay regulation when agents are loss averse

This article analyses the effects of a regulatory cap on executive pay when the agent is loss averse. I use a principal–agent model with moral hazard in which a principal and an agent bargain over an incentive contract. I show that even a non-binding cap on the agent’s payments can have consequences for the bargained outcome and consequently for the effort the agent exerts.     

Anticipated regret as an explanation of uncertainty aversion

The paper provides a psychological explanation of uncertainty aversion based on the fear of regret. We capture an agent’s regret using a reference-dependent utility function in which the agent’s utility depends on the performance of his chosen option relative to the performance of the option that would have been best ex post. An uncertain option is represented as a compound lottery. The basic idea is that selecting a compound lottery reveals information, which alters the ex post assessment of what the best choice would have been, inducing regret. We provide sufficient conditions under which regret implies uncertainty aversion in the sense of quasi-concave preferences over compound lotteries.     

Generalized measures of wage differentials

This paper considers measures of wage differentials not solely determined by mean comparisons but summarizing differences across complete wage distributions. The approach builds on considerations of risk or inequality aversion and on standard expected utility concepts. In an application to the gender pay gap in Luxembourg the disadvantage of women persists according to the proposed measures: lower mean wages for women are not compensated by differences in higher moments of wage distributions (e.g., by less dispersion) at least for realistic assumptions about women preferences toward risk and inequality. The paper also illustrates an original empirical model for wage distributions in the presence of covariates and under endogenous labour market participation.     

Dynamic asset allocation with ambiguous return predictability

We study an investor's optimal consumption and portfolio choice problem when he is confronted with two possibly misspecified submodels of stock returns: one with IID returns and the other with predictability. We adopt a generalized recursive ambiguity model to accommodate the investor's aversion to model uncertainty. The investor deals with specification doubts by slanting his beliefs about submodels of returns pessimistically, causing his investment strategy to be more conservative than the Bayesian strategy. Unlike in the Bayesian framework, the hedging demand against model uncertainty may cause the investor's stock allocation to decrease sharply given a small doubt of return predictability, even though the expected return according to the VAR model is large. Over much of the parameter space, the robust strategy is very close to the Bayesian strategy with Epstein–Zin preferences and risk aversion chosen to match the same average portfolio holdings. This is true in particular when the IID model is unlikely and the dividend yield is low, as in recent years. However, differences in strategies can be substantial if the IID model is unlikely and the dividend yield is high.     

Shaping beliefs in experimental markets for expert services: Guilt aversion and the impact of promises and money-burning options

In a credence goods game with an expert and a consumer, we study experimentally the impact of two devices that are predicted to induce consumer-friendly behavior if the expert has a propensity to feel guilty when he believes that he violates the consumerʼs payoff expectations: (i) an opportunity for the expert to make a non-binding promise; and (ii) an opportunity for the consumer to burn money. In belief-based guilt aversion theory the first opportunity shapes an expertʼs behavior if an appropriate promise is made and if it is expected to be believed by the consumer; by contrast, the second opportunity might change behavior even though this option is never used along the predicted path. Experimental results confirm the behavioral relevance of (i) but fail to confirm (ii).     

Excess supply equilibria

This paper addresses a fundamental problem in economic theory: How can there be equilibria of the economic system where some commodity is in excess supply, yet that commodity's relative price shows no tendency to fall? Of course, the principal example of such a phenomenon is an economy experiencing a prolonged period of involuntary unemployment of the labor force during which there is no significant change in the real wage.In the following pages, I shall describe a two-commodity, general equilibrium model that has a continuum of unemployment equilibria, one for any given unemployment rate. The important feature of this model is that workers establish their wage rates in an attempt to maximize expected utility. The information upon which these wage setting decisions are based is provided by actual labor market transactions.Despite the voluntary nature of the wage setting decision, I shall argue that each equilibrium of this economy exhibits involuntary unemployment in the Keynesian sense. For there will always be another equilibrium with a lower real wage, a higher level of employment, and at which (at least when workers are risk neutral) each worker achieves a higher level of expected utility.