IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v47y2020i1p119-137..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Non-optimal behaviour and estimation of behavioural choice models: a Monte Carlo study of risk preference estimation
[Econometric estimation of producers’ risk attitudes]

Author

Listed:
  • Zhengfei Guan
  • Feng Wu

Abstract

Expected utility models have been extensively used in the literature to model risk behaviour and estimate producers’ risk preferences where producers are assumed to maximise their expected utility in their production decisions. However, suboptimal behaviour due to budget or non-budget constraints is common, which, if not addressed, could result in biased and inconsistent estimates of parameters in behavioural choice models. A generalised model and an approximation approach are used to correct biases in the estimation of producers’ risk preferences by accounting for suboptimal behaviours. We conducted a Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate the bias correction performance of the proposed model using the generalised method of moments. Our results show that the proposed model and estimation procedure produce unbiased risk preference estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhengfei Guan & Feng Wu, 2020. "Non-optimal behaviour and estimation of behavioural choice models: a Monte Carlo study of risk preference estimation [Econometric estimation of producers’ risk attitudes]," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 47(1), pages 119-137.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:47:y:2020:i:1:p:119-137.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/erae/jbz001
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:erevae:v:47:y:2020:i:1:p:119-137.. 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 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.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.