IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ecm/emetrp/v71y2003i2p713-721.html

The Law of Demand and Risk Aversion

Author

Listed:
  • John K.H. Quah

    (St Hugh's College, Oxford, United Kingdom)

Abstract

This note proposes a necessary and sufficient condition on a utility function to guarantee that it generates a demand function satisfying the law of demand. This condition can be interpreted in terms of an agent's attitude towards lotteries in commodity space. As an application, we show that when an agent has an expected utility function, her demand for securities satisfies the law of demand if her coefficient of relative risk aversion does not vary by more than 4. Copyright The Econometric Society 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • John K.H. Quah, 2003. "The Law of Demand and Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(2), pages 713-721, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecm:emetrp:v:71:y:2003:i:2:p:713-721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Amir, Rabah & Evstigneev, Igor V., 2018. "A new look at the classical Bertrand duopoly," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 99-103.
    2. Ivan Boldyrev & Olessia Kirtchik, 2014. "General Equilibrium Theory behind the Iron Curtain: The Case of Victor Polterovich," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 435-461, Fall.
    3. Quah, John K. -H., 2003. "Market demand and comparative statics when goods are normal," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 317-333, June.
    4. Franks, Edwin & Bryant, William D.A., 2017. "The Uncompensated Law of Demand: A ‘Revealed Preference’ approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 105-111.
    5. Lanier, Joshua, 2020. "Risk, ambiguity, and Giffen assets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    6. Hua Chen & Michael Sherris & Tao Sun & Wenge Zhu, 2013. "Living With Ambiguity: Pricing Mortality-Linked Securities With Smooth Ambiguity Preferences," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 80(3), pages 705-732, September.
    7. W D A Bryant, 2009. "General Equilibrium:Theory and Evidence," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 6875, September.
    8. Michael Jerison & John K.-H. Quah, 2006. "Law of Demand," Discussion Papers 06-07, University at Albany, SUNY, Department of Economics.
    9. Andrés Carvajal & Rahul Deb & James Fenske & John Quah, 2014. "A nonparametric analysis of multi-product oligopolies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 57(2), pages 253-277, October.
    10. Chambers, Christopher P. & Echenique, Federico & Shmaya, Eran, 2010. "On behavioral complementarity and its implications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(6), pages 2332-2355, November.
    11. Yakar Kannai & Larry Selden, 2014. "Violation of the Law of Demand," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 55(1), pages 1-28, January.
    12. Peter Moffatt & Keith Moffatt, 2011. "Mirror utility functions and reflexion properties of various classes of goods," University of East Anglia Applied and Financial Economics Working Paper Series 031, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    13. John Quah, 2004. "The aggregate weak axiom in a financial economy through dominant substitution effects," Economics Papers 2004-W18, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    14. Siemroth, Christoph, 2014. "Why prediction markets work : the role of information acquisition and endogenous weighting," Working Papers 14-29, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    15. Giraud Gael & Quah John K.-H., 2003. "Homothetic or Cobb-Douglas Behavior Through Aggregation," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-23, December.
    16. Paul Oslington, 2012. "General Equilibrium: Theory and Evidence," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(282), pages 446-448, September.

    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:ecm:emetrp:v:71:y:2003:i:2:p:713-721. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/essssea.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.