IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/asu/wpaper/2132848.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Increased Risk-Bearing with Background Risk

Author

Abstract

Analyses of risk-bearing often assume that agents face only one risk when deciding how much risk to bear. Agents however usually face several risks at the same time and the interaction between risks can affect the willingness to bear any particular one of them. We consider how the introduction of uninsurable background risk affects the comparative statics predictions of distribution changes in the standard two-asset portfolio model. We show that such predictions are fairly robust, no matter what the correlation between the background risk and the risky asset's return distribution. We consider changes in the conditional distributions of the risky asset's return (holding the marginal distribution of the background risk fixed); and changes in the marginal distribution of the asset's return (holding the conditional distributions of the background risk fixed). For the first question, a version of Gollier's (1995) Central Riskiness order is sufficient and necessary to increase risk-bearing. For the second question, Monotone Likelihood Ratio improvements are sufficient and necessary.

Suggested Citation

  • Edward Schlee & Christian Gollier, "undated". "Increased Risk-Bearing with Background Risk," Working Papers 2132848, Department of Economics, W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University.
  • Handle: RePEc:asu:wpaper:2132848
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wpcarey.asu.edu/tools/mytools/pubs_admin/FILES/RiskBearing04_.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meyer, Jack & Ormiston, Michael B, 1994. "The Effect on Optimal Portfolios of Changing the Return to a Risky Asset: The Case of Dependent Risky Returns," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(3), pages 603-612, August.
    2. Meyer, Jack & Ormiston, Michael B, 1985. "Strong Increases in Risk and Their Comparative Statics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 26(2), pages 425-437, June.
    3. Cheng, Hsueh-Cheng & Magill, Michael J P & Shafer, Wayne J, 1987. "Some Results on Comparative Statics under Uncertainty," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 28(2), pages 493-507, June.
    4. Paul R. Milgrom, 1981. "Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 380-391, Autumn.
    5. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wagener, Andreas & Zenker, Juliane, 2018. "Decoupled but not neutral: The effects of stochastic transfers on investment and incomes in rural Thailand," TVSEP Working Papers wp-008, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute for Environmental Economics and World Trade, Project TVSEP.
    2. Huang, Hung-Hsi & Wang, Ching-Ping, 2013. "Portfolio selection and portfolio frontier with background risk," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 177-196.
    3. Wagener, Andreas & Zenker, Juliane, 2015. "Stochastic Transfers, Risky Investment and Incomes: Evidence from an Income Guarantee Program in Thailand," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-562, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    4. Andreas Wagener & Juliane Zenker, 2021. "Decoupled but Not Neutral: The Effects of Counter‐Cyclical Cash Transfers on Investment and Incomes in Rural Thailand†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1637-1660, October.
    5. Hallegatte,Stephane & Bangalore,Mook & Jouanjean,Marie Agnes, 2016. "Higher losses and slower development in the absence of disaster risk management investments," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7632, The World Bank.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. EECKHOUDT, Louis & Christian GOLLIER, 1994. "Demand for Risky Assets and Stochastic Dominance: A Note," Working Papers 007, Risk and Insurance Archive.
    2. G. Dionne & F. Gagnon & K. Dachraoui, 1997. "Increases in risk and optimal portfolio," THEMA Working Papers 97-29, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    3. Chiu, W. Henry, 2019. "Comparative statics in an ordinal theory of choice under risk," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 113-123.
    4. Hennessy, David A., 1993. "Applications of contingent claims theory to microeconomic problems," ISU General Staff Papers 1993010108000011822, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Takashi Nishiwaki, 2020. "Does Ambiguity Generate Demand for Options?," Working Papers 2011, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    6. Angelos Liontakis, 2020. "How Does a Policymaker Rank Regional Income Distributions across Years? A Study on the Evolution of Greek Regional per Capita Income," Economies, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-12, May.
    7. Bruno Jullien & Georges Dionne & Bernard Caillaud, 2000. "Corporate insurance with optimal financial contracting," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 16(1), pages 77-105.
    8. Christian Gollier & Edward Schlee, 2011. "Information And The Equity Premium," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(5), pages 871-902, October.
    9. Gelles, Gregory M. & Mitchell, Douglas W., 2002. "Increasingly mean-seeking utility functions and n-asset portfolios," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 911-919.
    10. Ohnishi, Masamitsu & Osaki, Yusuke, 2006. "The comparative statics on asset prices based on bull and bear market measure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 291-300, January.
    11. Hennessy, David A., 1999. "Capacity choice in a two-stage problem under uncertainty," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 177-182, November.
    12. Ginger Zhe Jin & Andrew Kato & John A. List, 2010. "That’S News To Me! Information Revelation In Professional Certification Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 104-122, January.
    13. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    14. Burkhard Schipper & Hee Yeul Woo, 2012. "Political Awareness and Microtargeting of Voters in Electoral Competition," Working Papers 124, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    15. Thomas Eichner & Andreas Wagener, 2002. "Increases in Risk and the Welfare State," CESifo Working Paper Series 685, CESifo.
    16. Dessein, Wouter & Frankel, Alexander & Kartik, Navin, 2023. "Test-Optional Admissions," CEPR Discussion Papers 18090, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Joshua Schwartzstein & Adi Sunderam, 2021. "Using Models to Persuade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 276-323, January.
    18. Chulyoung Kim, 2017. "An economic rationale for dismissing low-quality experts in trial," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 64(5), pages 445-466, November.
    19. Simon P. Anderson & John McLaren, 2012. "Media Mergers And Media Bias With Rational Consumers," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 831-859, August.
    20. Anissa Chaibi & Maria-Lenuta Ciupac-Ulici & Mircea-Cristian Gherman, 2014. "Do Recent Stochastic Tools Help to Better Understand Investors Preference and Asset Allocation?," Working Papers 2014-130, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, 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:asu:wpaper:2132848. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Steve Salik (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deasuus.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.