Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

What Do We Know About Decision Making Under Risk And Where Do We Go From Here?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Buschena, David E.
  • Zilberman, David

Abstract

This article reviews two major approached used in the past for risk analysis—the expected utility approach and the use of safety rules—and endeavors to reconcile their applicability and use in light of the recent nonexpected utility risk literature and working using the mean-Gini coefficient for risk analysis. This leads to the identification of several “"reduced form”" hypotheses that hold under a variety of theoretical structures and to a discussion of some empirical evidence regarding these hypotheses. The major lesson of recent research of individual behavior under risk is that it is not always consistent with the expected utility approach; in short, there is no generic model for evaluating behavior under risk.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/30756
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Western Agricultural Economics Association in its journal Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics.

Volume (Year): 19 (1994)
Issue (Month): 02 (December)
Pages:

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:30756

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://waeaonline.org/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Risk and Uncertainty;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Battalio, Raymond C & Kagel, John H & Jiranyakul, Komain, 1990. " Testing between Alternative Models of Choice under Uncertainty: Some Initial Results," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 25-50, March.
  2. Uzi Segal, 1984. "Nonlinear Decision Weights with the Independence Axiom," UCLA Economics Working Papers 353, UCLA Department of Economics.
  3. Grether, David M. & Plott, Charles R., . "Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon," Working Papers 152, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  4. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
  5. Shalit, Haim & Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 1984. " Mean-Gini, Portfolio Theory, and the Pricing of Risky Assets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 39(5), pages 1449-68, December.
  6. Machina, Mark J., 1989. "Comparative statics and non-expected utility preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 393-405, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Coble, Keith H. & Barnett, Barry J., 1999. "The Role Of Research In Producer Risk Management," Professional Papers 15803, Mississippi State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
  2. Graham R. Marshall & Kevin A. Parton & G.L. Hammer, 1996. "Risk Attitude, Planting Conditions And The Value Of Seasonal Forecasts To A Dryland Wheat Grower," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 40(3), pages 211-233, December.
  3. Pannell, David J. & Hailu, Getu & Weersink, Alfons & Burt, Amanda, 2007. "More Reasons Why Farmers Have So Little Interest in Futures Markets," Working Papers 9232, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
  4. Anderson, Kim B. & Mapp, Harry P., Jr., 1996. "Risk Management Programs In Extension," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 21(01), July.
  5. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John, 1997. "Consumer Response to Integrated Pest Management and Organic Agriculture: An Econometric Analysis," P Series 36727, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
  6. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John & Liptak, Clare, 1997. "Quality of Agricultural Produce: Consumer Preferences and Perceptions," P Series 36739, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
  7. Serrao, Amilcar & Coelho, Luis, 2004. "Cumulative Prospect Theory: A Study Of The Farmers' Decision Behavior In The Alentejo Dryland Region Of Portugal," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20245, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  8. Pannell, David J. & Malcolm, Bill & Kingwell, Ross S., 2000. "Are we risking too much? Perspectives on risk in farm modelling," Agricultural Economics: The Journal of the International Association of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 23(1), June.
  9. Serrao, Amilcar & Coelho, Luis, 2006. "The Role of area-yield crop insurance program face to the Mid-term Review of Common Agricultural Policy," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21411, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  10. Bharat M. Upadhyay & Douglas L. Young, 2004. "An Operational Approach For Evaluating Investment Risk: An Application To The No-Till Transition," Others 0412002, EconWPA.
  11. Ritchie, John W. & Abawi, G. Yahya & Dutta, Sunil C. & Harris, Trevor R. & Bange, Michael, 2004. "Risk management strategies using seasonal climate forecasting in irrigated cotton production: a tale of stochastic dominance," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(1), March.
  12. Pannell, David J. & Malcolm, Bill & Kingwell, Ross S., 2000. "Are we risking too much? Perspectives on risk in farm modelling," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 69-78, June.
  13. Serrao, Amilcar & Coelho, Luis, 2005. "Analysing Farmers' Decision-Making Process Face to the Mid-Term Review of the Common Agricultural Policy in the Alentejo region of Portugal," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19266, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  14. Bharat M. Upadhyay & Douglas L. Young, 2005. "An Operational Approach for Evaluating Investment Risk: An Application to the No-Till Transition," Working Papers 2005-1, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:30756. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.