Bivariate almost stochastic dominance

Univariate almost stochastic dominance has been widely studied and applied since its introduction by Leshno and Levy (Manag Sci 48:1074–1085, 2002). This paper extends this construction to the bivariate case by means of suitable two-attribute utility functions. After having confined correlation aversion and correlation loving to some acceptable levels, bivariate almost stochastic dominance rules are introduced for the preferences exhibiting confined correlation aversion and confined correlation loving. The impact of a change in risk in terms of bivariate almost stochastic dominance on optimal saving is analyzed as an application, as well as the effect of envy and altruism on income distributions. Finally, alternative definitions of bivariate almost stochastic dominance are discussed, as well as testing procedures for such dominance rules in financial problems.     

Modeling non-monotone risk aversion using SAHARA utility functions

We develop a new class of utility functions, SAHARA utility, with the distinguishing feature that it allows absolute risk aversion to be non-monotone and implements the assumption that agents may become less risk averse for very low values of wealth. The class contains the well-known exponential and power utility functions as limiting cases. We investigate the optimal investment problem under SAHARA utility and derive the optimal strategies in an explicit form using dual optimization methods. We also show how SAHARA utility functions extend the class of contingent claims that can be valued using indifference pricing in incomplete markets.     

Risk Aversion and the Investment Horizon: A New Perspective on the Time Diversification Debate

Investment managers generally subscribe to the principle of time diversification. This implies that a larger portion of the portfolio should be devoted to risky assets as the investment horizon increases. In contrast, academics have shown that for investors with utility functions characterized by constant relative risk aversion, the optimal asset-allocation strategy is independent of the investment horizon. The relative risk aversion in these studies is assumed to be constant both with respect to wealth as well as investment horizon. We suggest a utility function that explicitly captures the notion that individuals are more risk tolerant when the investment horizon is long, thereby validating the intuitively appealing time diversification argument.     

Production and insurance under regret aversion

This paper examines the behavior of a regret-averse producer facing revenue risk. To insure against the revenue risk, the producer can purchase a coinsurance contract with an endogenously chosen coinsurance rate. Regret-averse preferences are characterized by a utility function that includes disutility from having chosen ex-post suboptimal alternatives. We show that the regret-averse producer never fully insures against the revenue risk even though the coinsurance contract is actuarially fair. When the producer is sufficiently regret averse and the loss probability is high, we further show that the regret-averse producer chooses not to purchase the actuarially fair coinsurance contract. Even when purchasing the actuarially fair coinsurance contract is optimal, we derive sufficient conditions under which the regret-averse producer reduces the optimal output level as compared to that without the coinsurance contract. These results are distinct from those under pure risk aversion, thereby making the consideration of regret aversion crucial.     

Risk and regret aversions on optimal bank interest margin under capital regulation

This paper examines the bank's optimal loan rate (and thus the bank's interest margin) under more stringent capital regulation when the bank is not only risk-averse but also regret-averse. Risk-averse preferences are characterized by an option-based utility function that includes disutility from the dislike of bank equity risk. Regret-averse preferences feature an option-based utility function that includes disutility from having chosen ex-post suboptimal alternatives. We show that an increase in bank capital requirement results in an increased margin under risk aversion dominating regret aversion, whereas it results in a reduced margin under regret aversion dominating risk aversion. The former holds when risk aversion domination stems from increasing risk-averse preference, but not from decreasing regret-averse preference, while the latter holds when regret aversion domination results from either decreasing risk-averse or increasing regret-averse preference. Risk aversion, as such, makes the bank more prudent and less prone to risk-taking, while regret aversion, as such, makes the bank less prudent and more prone to risk-taking.     

Monotone risk aversion

Summary. This paper defines decreasing absolute risk aversion in purely behavioral terms without any assumption of differentiability and shows that a strictly increasing and risk averse utility function with decreasing absolute risk aversion is necessarily differentiable with an absolutely continuous derivative. A risk averse utility function has decreasing absolute risk aversion if and only if it has a decreasing absolute risk aversion density, and if and only if the cumulative absolute risk aversion function is increasing and concave. This leads to a characterization of all such utility functions. Analogues of these results also hold for increasing absolute and for increasing and decreasing relative risk aversion.Received: 31 January 2003, Revised: 15 January 2004, JEL Classification Numbers: D81.The views, thoughts and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author in his individual capacity and should not in any way be attributed to Morgan Stanley or to Lars Tyge Nielsen as a representative, officer, or employee of Morgan Stanley.     

Aspects of optimal unemployment insurance : Search, leisure, savings and capital market imperfections

Unemployment insurance is analysed in the optimal taxation framework. Benefits discourage search and thus raise unemployment. A perfect capital market model is developed and solved explicitly for a constant absolute risk aversion utility function. For ‘realistic’ parameter values low replacement rates (less than 50%) are optimal. If there is no lending or borrowing the optimal rates rise to about 75%. Alternative models also admit leisure as a good and the input to search; this reduces optimal replacement when the capital market is perfect. When it is nonexistent the optimal benefits depend on the value of leisure - rising as it falls. Alternatives to constant benefits conditional on continued unemployment are considered.     

Risk aversion,impatience, and optimal timing decisions

In this paper, a theory measuring a decision maker's aversion to temporal risks is developed in the context of a simple choice framework that admits the interpretation “time varying utility of wealth.” A relation “more temporally risk averse” is defined and characterized in terms of instantaneous risk aversion (the usual single variable case) and impatience. A further characterization of this relation is obtained in the context of a class of action timing problems known as optimal stopping problems and is applied to preference based investigations of information production, incentives to innovate, and job search.     

Epstein–Zin Utility in DICE: Is Risk Aversion Irrelevant to Climate Policy?

Climate change involves uncertain probabilities of catastrophic risks, and very longterm consequences of current actions. Climate economics, therefore, is centrally concerned with the treatment of risk and time. Yet conventional assumptions about utility and optimal economic growth create a perverse connection between risk aversion and time preference, such that more aversion to current risks implies less concern for future outcomes, and vice versa. The same conflation of risk aversion and time preference leads to the equity premium puzzle in finance. A promising response to the equity premium puzzle, the recursive utility of Epstein and Zin, allows separation of risk aversion and time preference—at the cost of considerable analytic complexity. We introduce an accessible implementation of Epstein–Zin utility into the DICE model of climate economics, creating a hybrid “EZ-DICE” model. Using Epstein–Zin parameters from the finance literature and climate uncertainty parameters from the science literature, we find that the optimal climate policy in EZ-DICE calls for rapid abatement of carbon emissions; it is similar to standard DICE results with the discount rate set to equal the risk-free rate of return. EZ-DICE solutions are sensitive to the intertemporal elasticity of substitution, but remarkably insensitive to risk aversion. Insensitivity to risk aversion may reflect the difficulty of modeling catastrophic risks within DICE. Implicit in DICE are strong assumptions about the cost of climate stabilization and the certainty and speed of success; under these assumptions, risk aversion would in fact be unimportant. A more realistic analysis will require a subtler treatment of catastrophic climate risk.     

Risk preference and indirect utility in portfolio-choice problems

We consider a portfolio-choice problem with one risky and one safe asset, where the utility function exhibits decreasing absolute risk aversion (DARA). We show that the indirect utility function of the portfolio-choice problem need not exhibit DARA. However, if the (optimal) marginal propensity to invest is positive for both assets, which is true when the utility function exhibits nondecreasing relative risk aversion, then the DARA property is carried over from the direct to the indirect utility function.     

On the theory of risk aversion and the theory of risk

Relationships between the theory of risk aversion and the theory of risk have been noted by Diamond and Stiglitz [12], Kihlstrom and Mirman [24], and Leland [29]. The main result of this paper is a characterization of the Pratt and Kihlstrom-Mirman [24, 46] relation “more risk averse” between utility functions in terms of a stochastic dominance or “riskier” relation between certain probability measures derived from these utility functions. This result is used in the comparison of risk-adjusted portfolio yields to extend to the several risky asset case the intuition provided by the Arrow-Pratt [1, 46] portfolio theorem that “more risk averse” means “will take less risk.”     

The effect of decision weights in bargaining problems

Bargaining problems are considered where the preferences of the bargainers deviate from expected utility but can be modelled according to rank-dependent utility theory. Under rank-dependent utility both the utility function and the probability weighting function influence the risk attitude of a decision maker. The same definition of risk aversion leads to two forms of risk aversion: utility risk aversion and probabilistic risk aversion. The main finding is that these two forms can have surprisingly opposite consequences for bargaining solutions that exhibit a weak monotonicity property. In particular, in a large class of bargaining problems both increased utility risk aversion and decreased probabilistic risk aversion of the opponent are advantagous for a player. This is demonstrated for the Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solution. The Nash bargaining solution does not behave regularly in this respect.     

Portfolio Fishing

The optimal fishing pattern in a multi-cohort fishery is determined using risk theory.Portfolio theory becomes applicable by treating different age groups of fish as different assets. A possibility set is derived using data on Icelandic cod fisheries. In the presence of risk aversion, it is shown that the abrupt behavior found in deterministic models is changed towards a smoother fishing pattern. The historical selection pattern for the Icelandic cod stock is shown to be near optimal using a maximal effort-type cost function, but historical levels of effort are inefficient and lead to less profit and greater fluctuations than implied by profit or utility maximization.     

Comparative risk aversion: A formal approach with applications to saving behavior

We consider a formal approach to comparative risk aversion and apply it to intertemporal choice models. This allows us to ask whether standard classes of utility functions, such as those inspired by Kihlstrom and Mirman (1974) [16], Selden (1978) [27], Epstein and Zin (1989) [10] and Quiggin (1982) [25] are well ordered in terms of risk aversion. Moreover, opting for this model-free approach allows us to establish new general results on the impact of risk aversion on savings behaviors. In particular, we show that risk aversion enhances precautionary savings, clarifying the link that exists between the notions of prudence and risk aversion.     

Regret theory and the competitive firm: A comment

In a recent paper, Wong [Wong, K. P. (2014), Regret theory and the competitive firm. Economic Modelling, 36, 172–175.] develops a model to examine the production behavior of a regret averse competitive firm. Wong discusses the sufficient condition to ensure the conventional result that the optimal output level under uncertainty is less than that under certainty hold. Our contributions in this note are two-fold. Firstly, we point out that Wong's condition in terms of the first order derivatives of the utility function and the regret function is actually not sufficient. Secondly and more importantly, we show that a sufficient condition should be in terms of the relatively increase rate of the first order derivatives of the two functions. That's, it's the ratio of the risk aversion and regret aversion degree that matters. Our proposed condition requests that the firm should be not too regret averse.     

Diversification versus optimality: is there really a diversification puzzle?

In this paper, we provide a general valuation of the diversification attitude of investors. First, we empirically examine the diversification of mean-variance optimal choices in the US stock market during the 11-year period 2003–2013. We then analyze the diversification problem from the perspective of risk-averse investors and risk-seeking investors. Second, we prove that investors’ optimal choices will be similar if their utility functions are not too distant, independent of their tolerance (or aversion) to risk. Finally, we discuss investors’ attitude towards diversification when the choices available to investors depend on several parameters.     

The Optimal Linear Income Tax Model: Utility or Equivalent Income?

This paper compares the use of equivalent income with that of utility, in the social welfare function, in optimal income tax models. Equivalent income is a money metric welfare measure that, unlike utility, is not affected by monotonic transformations of utility. The use of equivalent income is found to produce an optimal tax rate that is more sensitive to the degree of inequality aversion, compared with the use of utility. With Cobb-Douglas and CES utility functions, the optimal tax rate is the same for utility and equivalent income where relative inequality aversion is unity. When using equivalent incomes, the case for high marginal rates does not depend on the assumption of a very low elasticity of substitution between consumption and leisure.     

Utility Functions whose Parameters depend on Initial Wealth

Conventional one-period utility functions in Economics assume that initial wealth only enters preferences through the definition of final wealth. Consequently, those utility functions most utilized (i.e., exponential and quadratic) have implausible risk characteristics. The authors characterize a new class of utility function whose risk parameters depend upon initial wealth and obtain several desirable results. In particular, investors with quadratic and exponential utility functions can have decreasing risk aversion, and risky assets in a quadratic utility multi-asset environment do not have to be inferior as implied by the traditional framework.     

Underestimation of probabilities modifications: characterization and economic implications

The aim of this paper is to propose a behavioral characterization of individuals who underestimate probabilities modifications and to characterize this behavior in the standard preferences representation models under risk (expected utility, dual theory, rank dependent utility theory and MaxMin expected utility). Our main results are the following. Underreaction to probabilities modifications is in general independent from standard risk aversion and prudence. In models involving probabilities transformation functions, it is characterized by the slope of the probability transformation function. In the MaxMin expected utility model under risk, it is related to the weights of the maximal and minimal consequences in the preferences representation function. Considering a simple prevention decision, consisting in the reduction in the probability of a monetary loss, we show that individuals who underreact to probabilities modifications, invest less in prevention than individuals who objectively evaluate these modifications. Underreaction to probabilities modification is thus a possible explanation for low investment in prevention.     

Convex and decreasing absolute risk aversion is proper

Proper risk aversion, a pivotal concept in the study of behavioral conditions on utility functions, states that an undesirable risk can never be made desirable by the presence of an independent risk. It is well known that standard risk aversion is sufficient for this concept. We show in this short article that convex and decreasing absolute risk aversion is an alternative sufficient condition.