[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/actuec/v69y1993i1p111-141.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prenons-nous assez de risque dans les théories du risque?

Author

Listed:
  • Colson, Gérard

    (École d’administration des Affaires, Université de Liège)

Abstract
A short overview of how risk is conceived by practitioners reveals nine features of risk while theoreticians worry more about the way of solving the discrepancies between the predictions of the expected utility paradigm and the actual behaviour of people. Anyway, quickly expanding new theories of risk do not encompass enough components of risk. The last section of this paper is devoted to the new bipolar theory of risk proposed by the author, where risk is a vector and could benefit from a multicriterion approach. Un survol limité du concept du risque chez les praticiens nous révèle neuf caractéristiques du risque, tandis que les théoriciens s’intéressent surtout à la réduction des écarts entre les prédictions du paradigme de l’espérance d’utilité et le comportement des décideurs. Le foisonnement des nouvelles théories du risque n’incorporent pourtant pas assez de composantes du risque. Enfin, la dernière section de ce papier envisage une nouvelle théorie du risque : dans cette théorie bipolaire, le risque vectoriel peut bénéficier d’une approche multicritère.

Suggested Citation

  • Colson, Gérard, 1993. "Prenons-nous assez de risque dans les théories du risque?," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 69(1), pages 111-141, mars.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:69:y:1993:i:1:p:111-141
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/602099ar
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark McCord & Richard de Neufville, 1986. ""Lottery Equivalents": Reduction of the Certainty Effect Problem in Utility Assessment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 56-60, January.
    2. James S. Dyer & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1982. "Relative Risk Aversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(8), pages 875-886, August.
    3. Vijay S. Bawa, 1977. "Mathematical Programming of Admissible Portfolios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(7), pages 779-785, March.
    4. Amiram Gafni & George W. Torrance, 1984. "Risk Attitude and Time Preference in Health," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 440-451, April.
    5. Merton, Robert C., 1975. "Theory of Finance from the Perspective of Continuous Time," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 659-674, November.
    6. Hong, Chew Soo & Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 1987. "Risk aversion in the theory of expected utility with rank dependent probabilities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 370-381, August.
    7. Handa, Jagdish, 1977. "Risk, Probabilities, and a New Theory of Cardinal Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(1), pages 97-122, February.
    8. Andrew J. Hogan & James G. Morris & Howard E. Thompson, 1981. "Decision Problems Under Risk and Chance Constrained Programming: Dilemmas in the Transition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 698-716, June.
    9. Fishburn, P.C., 1984. "SSB Utility theory: an economic perspective," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 63-94, August.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Bawa, Vijay S., 1975. "Optimal rules for ordering uncertain prospects," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 95-121, March.
    12. Mao, James C. T., 1970. "Models of Capital Budgeting, E-V VS E-S," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(5), pages 657-675, January.
    13. David E. Bell, 1982. "Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 961-981, October.
    14. Chew, Soo Hong & Epstein, Larry G., 1990. "Nonexpected utility preferences in a temporal framework with an application to consumption-savings behaviour," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 54-81, February.
    15. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March.
    16. K. Borch, 1969. "A Note on Uncertainty and Indifference Curves," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 36(1), pages 1-4.
    17. Haim Levy, 1992. "Stochastic Dominance and Expected Utility: Survey and Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 555-593, April.
    18. Machina, Mark J, 1982. "A Stronger Characterization of Declining Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1069-1079, July.
    19. Karni, Edi, 1979. "On Multivariate Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(6), pages 1391-1401, November.
    20. Peter H. Farquhar, 1984. "State of the Art---Utility Assessment Methods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(11), pages 1283-1300, November.
    21. William J. Baumol, 1963. "An Expected Gain-Confidence Limit Criterion for Portfolio Selection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 174-182, October.
    22. David E. Bell, 1985. "Disappointment in Decision Making Under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 1-27, February.
    23. Karni, Edi, 1989. "Generalized Expected Utility Analysis of Multivariate Risk Aversion," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 30(2), pages 297-305, May.
    24. Kreps, David M & Porteus, Evan L, 1978. "Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 185-200, January.
    25. Stone, Bernell K, 1973. "A General Class of Three-Parameter Risk Measures," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 28(3), pages 675-685, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Karni, Edi & Schmeidler, David, 1990. "Utility Theory and Uncertainty," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275480, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    2. George Wu, 1999. "Anxiety and Decision Making with Delayed Resolution of Uncertainty," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 159-199, April.
    3. Mehrez, Abraham, 1997. "The interface between OR/MS and decision theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 38-47, May.
    4. Karni, Edi & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2015. "Ambiguity and Nonexpected Utility," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    5. Cillo, Alessandra & Delquié, Philippe, 2014. "Mean-risk analysis with enhanced behavioral content," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 764-775.
    6. Diecidue, E. & Schmidt, U. & Wakker, P.P., 2000. "A Theory of the Gambling Effect," Discussion Paper 2000-75, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    7. Abdellaoui, Mohammed & Bleichrodt, Han, 2007. "Eliciting Gul's theory of disappointment aversion by the tradeoff method," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 631-645, December.
    8. Arthur Charpentier & Alfred Galichon & Marc Henry, 2012. "Local Utility and Multivariate Risk Aversion," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-836, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    9. Servaas van Bilsen & Roger J. A. Laeven & Theo E. Nijman, 2020. "Consumption and Portfolio Choice Under Loss Aversion and Endogenous Updating of the Reference Level," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 3927-3955, September.
    10. Zvi Safra & Uzi Segal, 2005. "Are Universal Preferences Possible? Calibration Results for Non-Expected Utility Theories," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 633, Boston College Department of Economics.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Trabelsi, Mohamed Ali, 2006. "Les nouveaux modèles de décision dans le risque et l’incertain : quel apport ? [The new models of decision under risk or uncertainty : What approach?]," MPRA Paper 25442, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Machina, Mark J., 1985. "Generalized Expected Utility Analysis And The Nature Of Observed Violations Of The Independence Axiom," Regional Research Projects > 1985: S-180 Annual Meeting, March 24-27, 1985, Charleston, South Carolina 271790, Regional Research Projects > S-180: An Economic Analysis of Risk Management Strategies for Agricultural Production Firms.
    14. Arthur Charpentier & Alfred Galichon & Marc Henry, 2016. "Local Utility and Multivariate Risk Aversion," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 466-476, May.
    15. Dillenberger, David & Segal, Uzi, 2017. "Skewed noise," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 344-364.
    16. Graham Loomes & Ganna Pogrebna, 2014. "Testing for independence while allowing for probabilistic choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 189-211, December.
    17. Han Bleichrodt & Ulrich Schmidt, 2002. "A Context-Dependent Model of the Gambling Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(6), pages 802-812, June.
    18. Levy, Haim & Levy, Moshe, 2002. "Experimental test of the prospect theory value function: A stochastic dominance approach," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 1058-1081, November.
    19. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci, 2017. "Stochastic Dominance Analysis Without the Independence Axiom," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 1097-1109, April.
    20. Han Bleichrodt & Peter P. Wakker, 2015. "Regret Theory: A Bold Alternative to the Alternatives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(583), pages 493-532, March.
    21. Hui Huang & Shunming Zhang, 2011. "The Distorted Theory of Rank-Dependent Expected Utility," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 12(2), pages 233-263, November.

    More about this item

    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:ris:actuec:v:69:y:1993:i:1:p:111-141. 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: Benoit Dostie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/scseeea.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.