IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/edn/esedps/204.html

Inequality and Risk-Taking Behaviour

Author

Abstract

This paper investigates social influences on attitudes to risk and offers an evolutionary explanation of risk-taking by young low-ranked males. Becker, Murphy and Werning (2005) found that individuals about to participate in a status tournament may take fair gambles even though they are risk averse in both wealth and status. Here their model is generalised by use of the insight of Hopkins and Kornienko (2010) that in a tournament or status competition one can consider equality in terms of the status or rewards available as well as in initial endowments. While Becker et al. found that risk-taking is increasing in the equality of initial endowments, it is found here that it is increasing in the inequality of rewards in the tournament. Further, it is shown that the poorest will be risk loving if the lowest level of status awarded is sufficiently low. Thus, the disadvantaged in society rationally engage in risky behavior when social rewards are sufficiently unequal. Finally, as greater inequality in terms of social status induces gambling, it can cause greater inequality of wealth.

Suggested Citation

  • Ed Hopkins, 2011. "Inequality and Risk-Taking Behaviour," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 204, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    • Handle: RePEc:edn:esedps:204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.ed.ac.uk/papers/id204_esedps.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Tamminen, Saara, 2014. "Varying markups and income inequality in an open economy," Conference papers 332437, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    2. Woldegebrial Zeweld & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & Girmay Tesfay & Stijn Speelman, 2019. "Impacts of socio-psychological factors on smallholder farmers’ risk attitudes: empirical evidence and implications," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(2), pages 253-279, April.
    3. Mark Whitmeyer, 2018. "Dynamic Competitive Persuasion," Papers 1811.11664, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    4. Fafchamps, Marcel & Kebede, Bereket & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2015. "Keep up with the winners: Experimental evidence on risk taking, asset integration, and peer effects," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 59-79.
    5. Van Quy Nguyen, 2020. "Endowments-regarding preferences," Post-Print halshs-02966848, HAL.
    6. Mark Whitmeyer, 2021. "Submission Fees in Risk-Taking Contests," Papers 2108.13506, arXiv.org.
    7. Van Quy Nguyen, 2020. "Endowments-regarding preferences," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 20017, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    8. Nguyen, Van-Quy, 2021. "Endowment-regarding preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Kontogiannis, Nikolaos & Litina, Anastasia & Varvarigos, Dimitrios, 2019. "Occupation-induced status, social norms, and economic growth," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 348-360.
    10. Chen, Xi, 2017. "Does Daughter Deficit Promote Parental Substance Use? Longitudinal Evidence on Smoking from Rural China," IZA Discussion Papers 10860, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Van Quy Nguyen, 2020. "Endowments-regarding preferences," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-02966848, HAL.
    12. repec:ces:ceswps:_9253 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Chen, Xi, 2017. "Do Skewed Sex Ratios Among Children Promote Parental Smoking? Longitudinal Evidence from Rural China," GLO Discussion Paper Series 159, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    14. Whitmeyer, Mark, 2023. "Submission costs in risk-taking contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 101-112.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:edn:esedps:204. 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: Research Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deediuk.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.