IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/man/sespap/2303.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Dynamic Preference Foundations of Expected Exponentially-Discounted Utility

Author

Listed:
  • Craig S. Webb

Abstract

Expected exponentially-discounted utility (EEDU) is the standard model of choice over risk and time in economics. This paper considers the dynamic preference foundations of EEDU in the timed risks framework. We first provide dynamic preference foundations for a time-invariant expected utility representation. The new axioms for this are called foregone-risk independence and strong time invariance. This class of dynamic preferences includes EEDU as a special case. If foregone-risk independence is strengthened to a new condition called conditional consistency, then an EEDU representation results. Alternative approaches for extending exponential discounting axioms to risk are considered, resulting in five new preference foundations of EEDU.

Suggested Citation

  • Craig S. Webb, 2023. "Dynamic Preference Foundations of Expected Exponentially-Discounted Utility," Economics Discussion Paper Series 2303, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    • Handle: RePEc:man:sespap:2303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hummedia.manchester.ac.uk/schools/soss/economics/discussionpapers/EDP-2303.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
    2. Ken Binmore & Ariel Rubinstein & Asher Wolinsky, 1986. "The Nash Bargaining Solution in Economic Modelling," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(2), pages 176-188, Summer.
    3. Muthoo,Abhinay, 1999. "Bargaining Theory with Applications," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521576475.
    4. Prakash, Prem, 1977. "On the consistency of a gambler with time preference," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 92-98, June.
    5. Millner, Antony & Heal, Geoffrey, 2018. "Time consistency and time invariance in collective intertemporal choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 158-169.
    6. Hayashi, Takashi, 2003. "Quasi-stationary cardinal utility and present bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 343-352, October.
    7. Asen Kochov, 2015. "Time and No Lotteries: An Axiomatization of Maxmin Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 239-262, January.
    8. Grandmont, Jean-Michel, 1972. "Continuity properties of a von Neumann-Morgenstern utility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 45-57, February.
    9. Matthew O. Jackson & Leeat Yariv, 2015. "Collective Dynamic Choice: The Necessity of Time Inconsistency," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 150-178, November.
    10. Patrick DeJarnette & David Dillenberger & Daniel Gottlieb & Pietro Ortoleva, 2020. "Time Lotteries and Stochastic Impatience," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 619-656, March.
    11. Karni, Edi & Schmeidler, David, 1991. "Atemporal dynamic consistency and expected utility theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 401-408, August.
    12. Gilboa, Itzhak & Postlewaite, Andrew & Samuelson, Larry, 2016. "Memorable consumption," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 414-455.
    13. Yoram Halevy, 2015. "Time Consistency: Stationarity and Time Invariance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 335-352, January.
    14. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    15. Nachman, David C., 1975. "Risk aversion, impatience, and optimal timing decisions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 196-246, October.
    16. Nina Anchugina, 2017. "A simple framework for the axiomatization of exponential and quasi-hyperbolic discounting," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(2), pages 185-210, February.
    17. Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-154, Summer.
    18. Epstein, Larry G., 1983. "Stationary cardinal utility and optimal growth under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 133-152, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kim, Jeongbin & Lim, Wooyoung & Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian, 2020. "Bargaining and Time Preferences: An Experimental Study," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 254, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    2. Christopher P. Chambers & Federico Echenique & Alan D. Miller, 2023. "Decreasing Impatience," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 527-551, August.
    3. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2020. "Expected discounted utility," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 88(2), pages 297-313, March.
    4. Takashi Hayashi & Michele Lombardi, 2021. "Social discount rate: spaces for agreement," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 9(2), pages 247-257, October.
    5. Lemoine, Derek, 2018. "Age-induced acceleration of time: Implications for intertemporal choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 143-152.
    6. Sebastian Schweighofer-Kodritsch, 2015. "Time Preferences and Bargaining," STICERD - Theoretical Economics Paper Series /2015/568, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    7. Murat Yilmaz, 2018. "An Extended Survey of Time-Inconsistency and Its Applications," Bogazici Journal, Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, Bogazici University, Department of Economics, vol. 32(1), pages 55-73.
    8. Ebert, Sebastian & Wei, Wei & Zhou, Xun Yu, 2020. "Weighted discounting—On group diversity, time-inconsistency, and consequences for investment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    9. Obara, Ichiro & Park, Jaeok, 2017. "Repeated games with general discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 348-375.
    10. Tangren Feng & Shaowei Ke, 2018. "Social Discounting and Intergenerational Pareto," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(5), pages 1537-1567, September.
    11. Mikhail Pakhnin, 2021. "Collective Choice with Heterogeneous Time Preferences," CESifo Working Paper Series 9141, CESifo.
    12. Jeongbin Kim & Wooyoung Lim & Sebastian Schweighofer-Kodritsch, 2023. "Patience Is Power: Bargaining and Payoff Delay," Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers 0015, Berlin School of Economics.
    13. Anchugina, Nina & Ryan, Matthew & Slinko, Arkadii, 2019. "Mixing discount functions: Implications for collective time preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1-14.
    14. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2005. "Alliances and negotiations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 128-141, March.
    15. Joalland, Olivier & Pereau, Jean-Christophe & Rambonilaza, Tina, 2019. "Bargaining local compensation payments for the installation of new power transmission lines," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 75-85.
    16. Laurent Denant-Boemont & Enrico Diecidue & Olivier l’Haridon, 2017. "Patience and time consistency in collective decisions," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 181-208, March.
    17. Venkat Venkatasubramanian & Yu Luo, 2018. "How much income inequality is fair? Nash bargaining solution and its connection to entropy," Papers 1806.05262, arXiv.org.
    18. Anke Gerber & Kirsten I. M. Rohde, 2018. "Weighted temporal utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 66(1), pages 187-212, July.
    19. Ansink, Erik & Weikard, Hans-Peter, 2009. "Contested water rights," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 247-260, June.
    20. Björn Brügemann & Pieter Gautier & Guido Menzio, 2019. "Intra Firm Bargaining and Shapley Values," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(2), pages 564-592.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:man:sespap:2303. 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: Marianne Sensier (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/semanuk.html .

    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.