Finding Pareto Optimal Insurance Contracts

This paper deals with on-line computation—or step-wise learning—of Pareto optimal insurance contracts. Our approach tolerates that the loss distribution might be unknown, intractable, or not well specified. Thus we accommodate fairly inexperienced parties. Losses are here simulated or observed, one at a time, and they cause iterated revisions of the premium. The mechanical and global nature of probability calculus thereby yields to more tentative, myopic procedures, possibly closer to how humans operate or reason in face of risk. Sequential revisions may also reduce the expense of insurers' time and money in seeking sufficient statistics. Emphasized below is the remarkable simplicity and stability of the resulting adaptive procedures. Special attention goes to catastrophic risks, and to subsidized or competitive insurance.     

Contract modifications and the basis behavior of live cattle futures

The purpose of this study was to assess the basis behavior of the Live Cattle Futures contract at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) before and after the 1995 contract changes. Additionally, an alternative method of basis calculation utilizing weighted mean futures prices versus settlement futures prices was compared to determine which method provides a better representation of the basis level. Within a regression model with heteroskedascity error framework, we found that the level of nearby basis in the period after June 1995 has shifted lower and the average monthly open interest of net commercial long positions has substantially increased after the contract modifications. These empirical results are consistent with the notion that more long activity entered the market in response to the contract modifications. Additionally, an alternative (new) measure of basis calculation (cash price minus weighted mean futures price) produced similar results to two other commonly used measures. In conclusion, the 1995 contract changes have neither increased nor decreased the volatility of live cattle basis. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 24:557–590, 2004     

The Falsification of Four Popular Hypotheses About the Asian Crisis

Various claims have been made about the causes of the Asian crisis and its spread. Here, we use data on the behaviour of capital flows during the crisis to test the strong forms of four such hypotheses, that portfolio investors and hedge funds played a dominant role in initiating and/or spreading the crisis; that moral hazard kept efficient markets from predicting the crisis; and, finally, the common lender hypothesis of Kaminsky and Reinhart. In the process we also test implications of the Calvo-Mendoza model of rational investor ignorance. All are falsified as monocausal explanations. For example, portfolio investments that could not have been subject to substantial moral hazard continued to flow into Asia until very shortly before the crisis. Likewise, banks were a much larger source of capital outflows during the crisis than were portfolio investors. While falsified in their strongest forms, several of these hypotheses in less strong forms should play a role in a more nuanced analysis. It is necessary to move past simple single-factor approaches in order to produce a more complete, synthetic explanation of this episode.     

Bibliometric analysis of the Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 1977–1983

Two questions formed the structure for examining the formal communication among researchers using the Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics (JCSHE) The first question pertained to the interrelationship between the literature published and cited in JCSHE. The second asked what impact the literature published in JCSHE had on authors publishing in other journals. By performing Bradford analysis using the 1,160 journal references cited by authors of 210 articles in the first seven volumes of JCSHE, 26 core journals were identified. JCSHE was ranked second because it was cited 54 times in 37 articles by 29 authors. Through citation analysis 17 citing articles published in 12 journals other than JCSHE were found. Seven of these 17 citing articles were published in other home economics journals.     

COUNTERTRADE AS TRADE CREATION AND TRADE DIVERSION

This paper analyzes countertrade as a special case of a customs union in which the countertrade agreement gives rise (as in customs union theory) to both trade-creating and trade-diverting effects. The net effects on welfare are ambiguous. A detailed case study from Egypt and brief examples from other countries illustrate the relevance of this interpretation .