IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v129y2019i622p2581-2607..html

Utility, Risk and Demand for Incomplete Insurance: Lab Experiments with Guatemalan Co-Operatives

Author

Listed:
  • Craig McIntosh
  • Felix Povel
  • Elisabeth Sadoulet

Abstract

We play a series of incentivised laboratory games with risk-exposed co-operativised Guatemalan coffee farmers to understand the demand for index-based rainfall insurance. We estimate an explicit utility curve for every player and hence predict expected utility demand under counterfactual scenarios. Using these estimates, we provide a precise money-metric decomposition of the extent to which the low observed demand for index insurance is driven by expected utility theory, or by behavioural issues arising from a prospect-style utility structure. Our results suggest that consumers value probabilistic insurance using a prospect-style utility function that is concave both in probabilities and in income.

Suggested Citation

  • Craig McIntosh & Felix Povel & Elisabeth Sadoulet, 2019. "Utility, Risk and Demand for Incomplete Insurance: Lab Experiments with Guatemalan Co-Operatives," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(622), pages 2581-2607.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:129:y:2019:i:622:p:2581-2607.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/uez005
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    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. Berg, Erlend & Blake, Michael & Morsink, Karlijn, 2022. "Risk sharing and the demand for insurance: Theory and experimental evidence from Ethiopia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 236-256.
    2. Eling, Martin & Ghavibazoo, Omid & Hanewald, Katja, 2021. "Willingness to take financial risks and insurance holdings: A European survey," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    3. Stoeffler, Quentin & Opuz, Gülce, 2022. "Price, information and product quality: Explaining index insurance demand in Burkina Faso," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    4. Peter John Robinson & W. J. Wouter Botzen, 2025. "Behavioural public policy for natural disaster preparedness and the role of economic experiments," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-7, December.
    5. Shukri Ahmed & Craig McIntosh & Alexandros Sarris, 2020. "The Impact of Commercial Rainfall Index Insurance: Experimental Evidence from Ethiopia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(4), pages 1154-1176, August.
    6. Anderberg, Dan & Morsink, Karlijn, 2020. "The introduction of formal insurance and its effect on redistribution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 22-45.
    7. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Richard Peter & Marc A. Ragin, 2023. "Probability weighting and insurance demand in a unified framework," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 48(1), pages 63-109, March.
    8. Glenn W. Harrison & Jia Min Ng, 2019. "Behavioral insurance and economic theory: A literature review," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 22(2), pages 133-182, July.
    9. Visser, Martine & le Roux, Leonard & Mulwa, Chalmers K. & Tibesigwa, Byela & Bezabih, Mintewab, 2024. "Adaptive investment with land tenure and weather risk: Behavioral evidence from Tanzania," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 398-434.
    10. Cárcamo, Jorge & von Cramon-Taubadel, Stephan, 2016. "Assessing small-scale raspberry producers’ risk and ambiguity preferences: evidence from field- experiment data in rural Chile," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260774, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    11. Tesselaar, Max & Botzen, W.J. Wouter & Robinson, Peter J. & Aerts, Jeroen C.J.H. & Zhou, Fujin, 2022. "Charity hazard and the flood insurance protection gap: An EU scale assessment under climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    12. Cárcamo, Jorge & Cramon-Taubadel, Stephan von, 2016. "Assessing small-scale raspberry producers' risk and ambiguity preferences: Evidence from field-experiment data in rural Chile," DARE Discussion Papers 1610, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    13. King, Michael & Singh, Anuj Pratap, 2020. "Understanding farmers’ valuation of agricultural insurance: Evidence from Vietnam," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    14. Visser, Martine & Jumare, Hafsah & Brick, Kerri, 2020. "Risk preferences and poverty traps in the uptake of credit and insurance amongst small-scale farmers in South Africa," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 826-836.
    15. Visser, Martine & Mulwa, Chalmers K. & Gitonga, Zachary & Baard, Max, 2025. "Weather uncertainty and demand for information in technology adoption: Case of Namibia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 116(C).

    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:oup:econjl:v:129:y:2019:i:622:p:2581-2607.. 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: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.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.