IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/93699.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Pareto Criterion on Systemic Risk

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Weijia

Abstract

Perfect risk sharing is not an optimal design for financial system because it can increase systemic risk by facilitating risk contagion among financial institutions. However, risk sharing dominates betting according to most Pareto efficiency criteria. One reason for this might be that those Pareto criteria consider individual risk rather than systemic risk and neglect that betting may reduce systemic risk by segmenting the financial system and preventing financial contagion. Refining Pareto criterion to cover systemic risk, I pro- pose the systemic Pareto criterion which has two features: 1) satisfying facts that betting dominates risk sharing when systemic risk is considered. 2) be- ing applicable to scenarios with constant endowment to which current criteria cannot provide compelling suggestions. One implication from this paper is that betting can act as the stabilizer of the economy and prohibiting betting is not always helpful for financial stability.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Weijia, 2019. "A Pareto Criterion on Systemic Risk," MPRA Paper 93699, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:93699
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/93699/1/MPRA_paper_93699.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/93909/1/MPRA_paper_93909.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/94013/1/MPRA_paper_93909.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Back, Kerry, 2010. "Asset Pricing and Portfolio Choice Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195380613.
    2. repec:spr:joecth:v:65:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s00199-016-1022-z is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Markus K. Brunnermeier & Alp Simsek & Wei Xiong, 2014. "A Welfare Criterion For Models With Distorted Beliefs," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 129(4), pages 1753-1797.
    4. Carsten Krabbe Nielsen, 2009. "Rational Overconfidence and Social Security," Discussion Paper Series 0916, Institute of Economic Research, Korea University.
    5. Christopher L. Foote & Kristopher S. Gerardi & Paul S. Willen, 2012. "Why did so many people make so many ex post bad decisions? the causes of the foreclosure crisis," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2012-07, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    6. Daron Acemoglu & Asuman Ozdaglar & Alireza Tahbaz-Salehi, 2015. "Systemic Risk and Stability in Financial Networks," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 564-608, February.
    7. Allen, Franklin & Babus, Ana & Carletti, Elena, 2012. "Asset commonality, debt maturity and systemic risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(3), pages 519-534.
    8. Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Bonanno, Giacomo, 1997. "The Logic of Belief Persistence," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(01), pages 39-59, April.
    9. Eric Danan & Thibault Gajdos & Brian Hill & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2016. "Robust Social Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(9), pages 2407-2425, September.
    10. Itzhak Gilboa & Dov Samet & David Schmeidler, 2004. "Utilitarian Aggregation of Beliefs and Tastes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(4), pages 932-938, August.
    11. Itzhak Gilboa & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2014. "No‐Betting‐Pareto Dominance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(4), pages 1405-1442, July.
    12. Fabio Castiglionesi & Fabio Feriozzi & Guido Lorenzoni, 2017. "Financial Integration and Liquidity Crises," NBER Working Papers 23359, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Joseph E. Stiglitz, 2010. "Risk and Global Economic Architecture: Why Full Financial Integration May Be Undesirable," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 388-392, May.
    14. Carsten Krabbe Nielsen, 2003. "Floating exchange rates versus a monetary union under rational beliefs: the role of endogenous uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 21(2), pages 293-315, March.
    15. Stiglitz Joseph E., 2010. "Contagion, Liberalization, and the Optimal Structure of Globalization," Journal of Globalization and Development, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 1-47, December.
    16. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63, pages 309-309.
    17. Mongin, Philippe, 2016. "Spurious Unanimity And The Pareto Principle," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(03), pages 511-532, November.
    18. Shiri Alon & Gabi Gayer, 2016. "Utilitarian Preferences With Multiple Priors," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 1181-1201, May.
    19. repec:wsi:qjfxxx:v:02:y:2012:i:01:n:s201013921250005x is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Hammond, Peter J, 1981. "Ex-ante and Ex-post Welfare Optimality under Uncertainty," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 48(191), pages 235-250, August.
    21. Amil Dasgupta, 2004. "Financial Contagion Through Capital Connections: A Model of the Origin and Spread of Bank Panics," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(6), pages 1049-1084, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risk Sharing; Heterogenous Beliefs; Pareto Efficiency; Systemic Risk;

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation

    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:pra:mprapa:93699. 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: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.