IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00567952.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Apportioning of risks via stochastic dominance

Author

Listed:
  • H. Schlesinger
  • L. Eeckhoudt

    (LEM - Lille - Economie et Management - UCL - Université catholique de Lille - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • I. Tsetlin

Abstract

Consider a simple two-state risk with equal probabilities for the two states. In particular, assume that the random wealth variable Xi dominates Yi via ith-order stochastic dominance for i = M,N. We show that the 50-50 lottery [XN + YM, YN + XM] dominates the lottery [XN + XM, YN + YM] via (N + M)th-order stochastic dominance. The basic idea is that a decision maker exhibiting (N + M)th-order stochastic dominance preference will allocate the state-contingent lotteries in such a way as not to group the two "bad" lotteries in the same state, where "bad" is defined via ith-order stochastic dominance. In this way, we can extend and generalize existing results about risk attitudes. This lottery preference includes behavior exhibiting higher order risk effects, such as precautionary effects and tempering effects.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • H. Schlesinger & L. Eeckhoudt & I. Tsetlin, 2009. "Apportioning of risks via stochastic dominance," Post-Print hal-00567952, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00567952
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00567952
    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 search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kimball, Miles S, 1990. "Precautionary Saving in the Small and in the Large," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 53-73, January.
    2. Menezes, Carmen F. & Wang, X.Henry, 2005. "Increasing outer risk," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 875-886, November.
    3. Guido Baltussen & Thierry Post & Pim van Vliet, 2006. "Violations of Cumulative Prospect Theory in Mixed Gambles with Moderate Probabilities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(8), pages 1288-1290, August.
    4. Louis Eeckhoudt & Béatrice Rey & Harris Schlesinger, 2007. "A Good Sign for Multivariate Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 117-124, January.
    5. G. Hanoch & H. Levy, 1969. "The Efficiency Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 335-346.
    6. Alain Chateauneuf & Ghizlane Lakhnati & Eric Langlais, 2005. "On the precautionary motive for savings and prudence, in an EU and a NEU framework," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques b05034, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    7. Mao, James C T, 1970. "Survey of Capital Budgeting: Theory and Practice," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 349-360, May.
    8. W. Henry Chiu, 2005. "Skewness Preference, Risk Aversion, and the Precedence Relations on Stochastic Changes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(12), pages 1816-1828, December.
    9. Louis Eeckhoudt & Harris Schlesinger, 2006. "Putting Risk in Its Proper Place," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 280-289, March.
    10. Ekern, Steinar, 1980. "Increasing Nth degree risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 329-333.
    11. Jean, William H, 1980. " The Geometric Mean and Stochastic Dominance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 35(1), pages 151-158, March.
    12. Pratt, John W & Zeckhauser, Richard J, 1987. "Proper Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 143-154, January.
    13. Patrick L. Brockett & Linda L. Golden, 1987. "A Class of Utility Functions Containing all the Common Utility Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(8), pages 955-964, August.
    14. Menezes, C & Geiss, C & Tressler, J, 1980. "Increasing Downside Risk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 921-932, December.
    15. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    16. Lajeri-Chaherli, Fatma, 2004. "Proper prudence, standard prudence and precautionary vulnerability," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 29-34, January.
    17. A. Sandmo, 1970. "The Effect of Uncertainty on Saving Decisions," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 353-360.
    18. Zilcha, Itzhak & Chew, Soo Hong, 1990. "Invariance of the efficient sets when the expected utility hypothesis is relaxed," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 125-131, January.
    19. Jean, William H, 1984. " The Harmonic Mean and Other Necessary Conditions for Stochastic Dominance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 39(2), pages 527-534, June.
    20. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    21. Wong, Wing-Keung, 2007. "Stochastic dominance and mean-variance measures of profit and loss for business planning and investment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(2), pages 829-843, October.
    22. Fishburn, Peter C. & Willig, Robert D., 1984. "Transfer principles in income redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 323-328, December.
    23. Gollier, Christian & Pratt, John W, 1996. "Risk Vulnerability and the Tempering Effect of Background Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(5), pages 1109-1123, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:hal:journl:hal-00567952. 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: (CCSD). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.