This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Strategic Risk Management Behavior: What Can Utility Functions Tell Us?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Pennings, Joost M.E.
Garcia, Philip

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The validity of the utility concept, particularly in an expected utility framework, has been questioned because of its inability to predict revealed behavior. In this paper we focus on the global shape of the utility function instead of the local shape of the utility function. We examine the extent of heterogeneity in the global shape of the utility function of decision makers and test whether its shape predicts strategic risk management behavior. We assess the utility functions and relate them to strategic decisions for portfolio managers (N = 104) and hog farmers (N = 239). The research design allows us to examine the robustness of our results and the extent to which the results can be generalized. Furthermore, we assess the shape of the utility functions for these decision makers applying two different methods. This allows us to further test the robustness of our empirical results. If there exists a relationship between the shape of the utility function and strategic decisions, both methods should yield the same result. The empirical results indicate that the global shape of the utility function differs across decision makers (fully concave or convex versus S-shaped), and that the global shape predicts strategic decisions (e.g., asset allocation strategy in the case of portfolio managers; type of production process employed in the case of hog farmers). These findings support the notion that the often criticized concept of utility is a useful concept when studying actual behavior, and highlight the importance of considering decision-maker behavior over a wide outcome range when examining strategic behavior.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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/20388
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO with number 20388.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea04:20388

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Email:
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: Risk and Uncertainty;

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.:

  1. Fuhrken, Gebhard & Richter, Marcel K, 1991. "Additive Utility," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 83-105, January.
  2. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December. [Downloadable!]
  3. Binswanger, Hans P, 1981. "Attitudes toward Risk: Theoretical Implications of an Experiment in Rural India," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 867-90, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Hans P. Binswanger, 1980. "Attitudes Toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India," Artefactual Field Experiments 0008, The Field Experiments Website. [Downloadable!]
  5. Smith, Vernon L, 1991. "Rational Choice: The Contrast between Economics and Psychology," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(4), pages 877-97, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Butler, D. J., 2000. "Do non-expected utility choice patterns spring from hazy preferences? An experimental study of choice 'errors'," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 277-297, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Schwartz, Eduardo S, 1997. " The Stochastic Behavior of Commodity Prices: Implications for Valuation and Hedging," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(3), pages 923-73, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Hans P. Binswanger, 1981. "Attitudes Toward Risk: Theoretical Implications of an Experiment in Rural India," Artefactual Field Experiments 0009, The Field Experiments Website. [Downloadable!]
  9. Harrison, Glenn W., 1986. "Risk aversion and preference distortion in deterministic bargaining experiments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 22(2-3), pages 191-196. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Frederick Mosteller & Philip Nogee, 1951. "An Experimental Measurement of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59, pages 371. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS also indexes book chapters.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-26.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.