IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/red/issued/11-155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preferences for Risk in Dynamic Models with Adjustment Costs

Author

Listed:
  • Galina Vereshchagina

    (Arizona State University)

Abstract

This paper characterizes the solution to a consumption/savings decision problem in which one of the consumption goods involves transaction costs. It then analyzes how such adjustment costs affect consumers' risk attitudes. Previous studies have suggested that transaction costs, by resulting in infrequent but lumpy adjustments, magnify consumers' risk aversion with respect to moderate-stake risk and, simultaneously, stimulate the demand for large-stake wealth lotteries. This paper argues that such predictions, while naturally arising in static models, may disappear or even reverse in a dynamic setting, in which consumers can choose \emph{when} to make an adjustment. Namely, it shows that such an option can eliminate the demand for large-stake lotteries, and that the consumers choosing to delay the adjustment may be more tolerant to moderate-stake risks than in the absence of adjustment costs. The paper also illustrates that both predictions crucially depend on the relationship between the time discount rate in the utility function and the interest rate. (Copyright: Elsevier)

Suggested Citation

  • Galina Vereshchagina, 2014. "Preferences for Risk in Dynamic Models with Adjustment Costs," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 17(1), pages 86-106, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:red:issued:11-155 DOI: 10.1016/j.red.2013.02.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.red.2013.02.005
    Download Restriction: Access to full texts is restricted to ScienceDirect subscribers and institutional members. See http://www.sciencedirect.com/ for details.

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mulligan Casey B, 2001. "Aggregate Implications of Indivisible Labor," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, pages 1-35.
    2. Greenwood, Jeremy & Jovanovic, Boyan, 1990. "Financial Development, Growth, and the Distribution of Income," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 1076-1107, October.
    3. Vincenzo Quadrini, 2000. "Entrepreneurship, Saving and Social Mobility," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 3(1), pages 1-40, January.
    4. Grossman, Sanford J & Laroque, Guy, 1990. "Asset Pricing and Optimal Portfolio Choice in the Presence of Illiquid Durable Consumption Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 25-51, January.
    5. Fernando Alvarez & Patrick J. Kehoe & Pablo Neumeyer, 2002. "The time consistency of monetary and fiscal policies," Working Papers 616, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    6. Raj Chetty & Adam Szeidl, 2007. "Consumption Commitments and Risk Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 122(2), pages 831-877.
    7. Edward C. Prescott & Richard Rogerson & Johanna Wallenius, 2009. "Lifetime Aggregate Labor Supply with Endogenous Workweek Length," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 12(1), pages 23-36, January.
    8. Rogerson, Richard & Wallenius, Johanna, 2009. "Micro and macro elasticities in a life cycle model with taxes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(6), pages 2277-2292, November.
    9. Rogerson, Richard, 1988. "Indivisible labor, lotteries and equilibrium," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 3-16, January.
    10. S. Rao Aiyagari, 1994. "Uninsured Idiosyncratic Risk and Aggregate Saving," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 109(3), pages 659-684.
    11. Aubhik Khan & B. Ravikumar, 2002. "Costly Technology Adoption and Capital Accumulation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(2), pages 489-502, April.
    12. Mulligan Casey B, 2001. "Aggregate Implications of Indivisible Labor," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, pages 1-35.
    13. Krusell, Per & Mukoyama, Toshihiko & Rogerson, Richard & Sahin, Ayseg├╝l, 2008. "Aggregate implications of indivisible labor, incomplete markets, and labor market frictions," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 961-979, July.
    14. Marjorie Flavin & Shinobu Nakagawa, 2008. "A Model of Housing in the Presence of Adjustment Costs: A Structural Interpretation of Habit Persistence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 474-495.
    15. Galina Vereshchagina & Hugo A. Hopenhayn, 2009. "Risk Taking by Entrepreneurs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 1808-1830.
    16. Aubhik Khan & Julia K. Thomas, "undated". "Nonconvex Factor Adjustments in Equilibrium Business Cycle Models: Do Nonlinearities Matter?," GSIA Working Papers 2000-E33, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    17. Khan, Aubhik & Thomas, Julia K., 2003. "Nonconvex factor adjustments in equilibrium business cycle models: do nonlinearities matter?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, pages 331-360.
    18. Stokey, Nancy L., 2009. "Moving costs, nondurable consumption and portfolio choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(6), pages 2419-2439, November.
    19. Fratantoni, Michael C, 2001. "Homeownership, Committed Expenditure Risk, and the Stockholding Puzzle," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 241-259, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Adjustment costs; Consumption commitments; Dynamic discrete choice; Housing; Risk aversion; Lotteries; Equity premium puzzle; Patience; Borrowing constraints;

    JEL classification:

    • D14 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Saving; Personal Finance
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • E21 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Consumption; Saving; Wealth
    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates

    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:red:issued:11-155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christian Zimmermann). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/sedddea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.