IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v58y2014i4p491-509.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bliss, Catastrophe, and Rational Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Kenneth Arrow
  • Marcel Priebsch

Abstract

Lotteries with infinite expected utility are inconsistent with the axioms of expected utility theory. To rule them out, either the set of permissible lotteries must be restricted (to exclude, at a minimum, “fat-tailed” distributions such as that underlying the St. Petersburg Paradox and power laws that are popular in models of climate change), or the utility function must be bounded. This note explores the second approach and proposes a number of tractable specifications leading to utility functions that are bounded both from above and below. This property is intimately related to that of increasing relative risk aversion as first hypothesized by Arrow ( 1965 ). Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Kenneth Arrow & Marcel Priebsch, 2014. "Bliss, Catastrophe, and Rational Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(4), pages 491-509, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:58:y:2014:i:4:p:491-509
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-014-9788-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10640-014-9788-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-014-9788-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Quizon, Jaime B & Binswanger, Hans P & Machina, Mark J, 1984. "Attitudes toward Risk: Further Remarks," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 94(373), pages 144-148, March.
    2. Robert S. Pindyck, 2011. "Fat Tails, Thin Tails, and Climate Change Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(2), pages 258-274, Summer.
    3. Siegel, Frederick W & Hoban, James P, Jr, 1982. "Relative Risk Aversion Revisited," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 64(3), pages 481-487, August.
    4. Cohn, Richard A, et al, 1975. "Individual Investor Risk Aversion and Investment Portfolio Composition," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 30(2), pages 605-620, May.
    5. Joël Peress, 2004. "Wealth, Information Acquisition, and Portfolio Choice," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(3), pages 879-914.
    6. Martin L. Weitzman, 2009. "On Modeling and Interpreting the Economics of Catastrophic Climate Change," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 1-19, February.
    7. Gordon, Myron J & Paradis, G E & Rorke, C H, 1972. "Experimental Evidence on Alternative Portfolio Decision Rules," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 107-118, March.
    8. Levy, Haim, 1994. "Absolute and Relative Risk Aversion: An Experimental Study," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 289-307, May.
    9. Pierre‐André Chiappori & Monica Paiella, 2011. "Relative Risk Aversion Is Constant: Evidence From Panel Data," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(6), pages 1021-1052, December.
    10. Binswanger, Hans P, 1981. "Attitudes toward Risk: Theoretical Implications of an Experiment in Rural India," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 867-890, December.
    11. Morin, Roger A & Fernandez Suarez, Antonio, 1983. "Risk Aversion Revisited," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 38(4), pages 1201-1216, September.
    12. -, 2009. "The economics of climate change," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL para el Caribe (Estudios e Investigaciones) 38679, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    13. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1974. "The Use of Unbounded Utility Functions in Expected-Utility Maximization: Response," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 88(1), pages 136-138.
    14. Joseph Eisenhauer, 1997. "Risk aversion, wealth, and the DARA hypothesis: A new test," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 3(1), pages 46-53, February.
    15. Peter C. Fishburn, 1976. "Unbounded Utility Functions in Expected Utility Theory," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(1), pages 163-168.
    16. Richard M. H. Suen, 2009. "Bounding the CRRA Utility Functions," Working Papers 200902, University of California at Riverside, Department of Economics, revised Feb 2009.
    17. Friend, Irwin & Blume, Marshall E, 1975. "The Demand for Risky Assets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 900-922, December.
    18. MOSSIN, Jan, 1968. "Optimal multiperiod portfolio policies," LIDAM Reprints CORE 19, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    19. Terence M. Ryan, 1974. "The Use of Unbounded Utility Functions in Expected-Utility Maximization: Comment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 88(1), pages 133-135.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Yew-Kwang Ng, 2016. "The Importance of Global Extinction in Climate Change Policy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 7(3), pages 315-322, September.
    2. Ian Bateman & Hassan Benchekroun & Christian Vossler, 2015. "EAERE Award for the Best Paper Published in Environmental and Resource Economics During 2014," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(1), pages 1-2, September.
    3. Ohad Raveh & Yacov Tsur, 2018. "Resource Windfalls and Public Debt: The Role of Political Myopia," OxCarre Working Papers 205, Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies, University of Oxford.
    4. Buchholz Wolfgang & Heindl Peter, 2015. "Ökonomische Herausforderungen des Klimawandels," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 16(4), pages 324-350, December.
    5. Andrea Rampa, 2020. "Climate change, catastrophes and Dismal Theorem: a critical review [Klimawandel, Katastrophen und das „Dismal Theorem“: eine kritische Überprüfung]," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 40(2), pages 113-136, October.
    6. Christoph M. Rheinberger & Nicolas Treich, 2017. "Attitudes Toward Catastrophe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(3), pages 609-636, July.
    7. Partha Dasgupta, 2014. "Pricing climate change," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 13(4), pages 394-416, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ikefuji, Masako & Laeven, Roger J.A. & Magnus, Jan R. & Muris, Chris, 2020. "Expected utility and catastrophic risk in a stochastic economy–climate model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 214(1), pages 110-129.
    2. Guiso, Luigi & Sodini, Paolo, 2013. "Household Finance: An Emerging Field," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1397-1532, Elsevier.
    3. Ikefuji, Masako & Laeven, Roger J.A. & Magnus, Jan R. & Muris, Chris, 2015. "Expected utility and catastrophic consumption risk," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 306-312.
    4. George Samartzis & Nikitas Pittis, 2022. "Dynamic Estimates Of The Arrow-Pratt Absolute And Relative Risk Aversion Coefficients," Papers 2211.03604, arXiv.org.
    5. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    6. J. Francois Outreville, 2014. "Risk Aversion, Risk Behavior, and Demand for Insurance: A Survey," Journal of Insurance Issues, Western Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 37(2), pages 158-186.
    7. Masako Ikefuji & Roger Laeven & Jan Magnus & Chris Muris, 2014. "Expected Utility and Catastrophic Risk," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-133/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    8. J. François Outreville, 2015. "The Relationship Between Relative Risk Aversion And The Level Of Education: A Survey And Implications For The Demand For Life Insurance," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 97-111, February.
    9. Chaigneau, Pierre, 2013. "Explaining the structure of CEO incentive pay with decreasing relative risk aversion," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 4-23.
    10. Daniel Paravisini & Veronica Rappoport & Enrichetta Ravina, 2010. "Risk Aversion and Wealth: Evidence from Person-to-Person Lending Portfolios," NBER Working Papers 16063, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Paya, Ivan & Wang, Peng, 2016. "Wealth fluctuations and investment in risky assets: The UK micro evidence on households asset allocation," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(PA), pages 221-235.
    12. Masako Ikefuji & Roger J. A. Laeven & Jan R. Magnus & Chris Muris, 2011. "Weitzman meets Nordhaus: Expected utility and catastrophic risk in a stochastic economy-climate model," ISER Discussion Paper 0825, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    13. Andreas Oehler & Matthias Horn, 2021. "Behavioural portfolio theory revisited: lessons learned from the field," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(S1), pages 1743-1774, April.
    14. Laurent E. Calvet & Paolo Sodini, 2014. "Twin Picks: Disentangling the Determinants of Risk-Taking in Household Portfolios," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(2), pages 867-906, April.
    15. Assa, Hirbod & Zimper, Alexander, 2018. "Preferences over all random variables: Incompatibility of convexity and continuity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 71-83.
    16. Cherbonnier, Frédéric & Gollier, Christian, 2015. "Decreasing aversion under ambiguity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 606-623.
    17. Tang, Tao & Luo, Ronghua & Gu, Jing, 2023. "Lifetime asset allocation with long run risk and time various risk aversion," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 230-251.
    18. Kathleen Arano & Carl Parker & Rory Terry, 2010. "Gender‐Based Risk Aversion And Retirement Asset Allocation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 147-155, January.
    19. Alessandro Bucciol & Raffaele Miniaci, 2011. "Household Portfolios and Implicit Risk Preference," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1235-1250, November.
    20. Haim Levy & Moshe Levy, 2021. "Prospect theory, constant relative risk aversion, and the investment horizon," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-21, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:58:y:2014:i:4:p:491-509. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.