[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/nlsclt/2023_003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can climate shocks make vulnerable subjects more willing to take risks?

Author

Listed:
  • Holden, Stein T.

    (Centre for Land Tenure Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences)

  • Tilahun, Mesfin

    (Centre for Land Tenure Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences)

Abstract
While economists in the past tended to assume that individual preferences, including risk preferences, are stable over time, a recent literature has developed and indicates that risk preferences respond to shocks. This paper utilizes a natural experiment with covariate (drought) and idiosyncratic shocks in combination with an independent field risk experiment. The risk experiment uses a Certainty Equivalent - Multiple Choice List (CE-MCL) approach and is played 1-2 years after the subjects were (to a varying degree) exposed to a covariate drought shock or idiosyncratic shocks. The experimental approach facilitated a comprehensive assessment of shock effects on experimental risk premiums with varying probabilities of good and bad outcomes. The experiment also facilitates the estimation of the utility curvature in an Expected Utility (EU) model, and alternatively, separate estimation of probability weighting and utility curvature in three different Rank Dependent Utility (RDU) models with a two-parameter Prelec probability weighting function. Our study is the first to comprehensively test the theoretical predictions of Gollin and Pratt (1996) versus Quiggin (2003). Gollin and Pratt (1996) build on EU theory and state that an increase in background risk will make subjects more risk averse while Quiggin (2003) states that an increase in background risk can enhance risk-taking in certain types of non-EU models. We find strong evidence that such non-EU preferences dominate in our sample and can explain the surprising result. In our sample of resource-poor young adults living in a risky semiarid rural environment in Sub-Saharan Africa, we find that the covariate drought shock had negative effects on risk premiums and the utility curvature and caused an upward shift in the probability weighting function. To our knowledge, this is the first paper to carry out such a rigorous test of a shock effect on utility curvature and probability weighting.

Suggested Citation

  • Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2023. "Can climate shocks make vulnerable subjects more willing to take risks?," CLTS Working Papers 3/23, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:nlsclt:2023_003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nmbu.no/download/file/fid/58978
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lisa Cameron & Manisha Shah, 2015. "Risk-Taking Behavior in the Wake of Natural Disasters," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(2), pages 484-515.
    2. Angus Deaton, 2010. "Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(2), pages 424-455, June.
    3. Claudia R. Sahm, 2012. "How Much Does Risk Tolerance Change?," Quarterly Journal of Finance (QJF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(04), pages 1-38.
    4. Hans P. Binswanger, 1980. "Attitudes Toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(3), pages 395-407.
    5. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
    6. Ben Gillen & Erik Snowberg & Leeat Yariv, 2019. "Experimenting with Measurement Error: Techniques with Applications to the Caltech Cohort Study," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(4), pages 1826-1863.
    7. Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2008. "Stochastic models for binary discrete choice under risk: a critical primer and econometric comparison," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Risk Aversion in Experiments, pages 197-292, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    8. Chie Hanaoka & Hitoshi Shigeoka & Yasutora Watanabe, 2018. "Do Risk Preferences Change? Evidence from the Great East Japan Earthquake," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 298-330, April.
    9. Stein T. Holden & John Quiggin, 2017. "Climate risk and state-contingent technology adoption: shocks, drought tolerance and preferences," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(2), pages 285-308.
    10. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    11. John D. Hey & Chris Orme, 2018. "Investigating Generalizations Of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 3, pages 63-98, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Guiso, Luigi & Sapienza, Paola & Zingales, Luigi, 2018. "Time varying risk aversion," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(3), pages 403-421.
    13. Binswanger, Hans P, 1981. "Attitudes toward Risk: Theoretical Implications of an Experiment in Rural India," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 867-890, December.
    14. Günther, Isabel & Harttgen, Kenneth, 2009. "Estimating Households Vulnerability to Idiosyncratic and Covariate Shocks: A Novel Method Applied in Madagascar," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 1222-1234, July.
    15. Pratt, John W & Zeckhauser, Richard J, 1987. "Proper Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 143-154, January.
    16. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    17. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    18. Bourdeau-Brien, Michael & Kryzanowski, Lawrence, 2020. "Natural disasters and risk aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 818-835.
    19. Markus K. Brunnermeier & Stefan Nagel, 2008. "Do Wealth Fluctuations Generate Time-Varying Risk Aversion? Micro-evidence on Individuals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 713-736, June.
    20. Chie Hanaoka & Hitoshi Shigeoka & Yasutora Watanabe, 2015. "Do Risk Preferences Change? Evidence from Panel Data before and after the Great East Japan Earthquake," NBER Working Papers 21400, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. 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..
    22. Ryan Brown & Verónica Montalva & Duncan Thomas & Andrea Velásquez, 2019. "Impact of Violent Crime on Risk Aversion: Evidence from the Mexican Drug War," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(5), pages 892-904, December.
    23. Ferdinand M. Vieider & Peter Martinsson & Pham Khanh Nam & Nghi Truong, 2019. "Risk preferences and development revisited," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 1-21, February.
    24. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2022. "Are risk preferences explaining gender differences in investment behavior?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    25. Cassar, Alessandra & Healy, Andrew & von Kessler, Carl, 2017. "Trust, Risk, and Time Preferences After a Natural Disaster: Experimental Evidence from Thailand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 90-105.
    26. Stein T. Holden & John Quiggin, 2017. "Bounded awareness and anomalies in intertemporal choice: Zooming in Google Earth as both metaphor and model," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 15-35, February.
    27. Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
    28. John Quiggin, 2003. "Background risk in generalized expected utility theory," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 22(3), pages 607-611, October.
    29. Liebenehm, Sabine, 2018. "Temporal Stability of Risk Attitudes and the Impact of Adverse Shocks—A Panel Data Analysis from Thailand and Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 262-274.
    30. Said, Farah & Afzal, Uzma & Turner, Ginger, 2015. "Risk taking and risk learning after a rare event: Evidence from a field experiment in Pakistan," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 167-183.
    31. Maarten J. Voors & Eleonora E. M. Nillesen & Philip Verwimp & Erwin H. Bulte & Robert Lensink & Daan P. Van Soest, 2012. "Violent Conflict and Behavior: A Field Experiment in Burundi," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 941-964, April.
    32. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Achilleas Vassilopoulos, 2021. "Intertemporal stability of survey‐based measures of risk and time preferences," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 655-683, August.
    33. Goytom Abraha Kahsay & Daniel Osberghaus, 2018. "Storm Damage and Risk Preferences: Panel Evidence from Germany," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 301-318, September.
    34. 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.
    35. Page, Lionel & Savage, David A. & Torgler, Benno, 2014. "Variation in risk seeking behaviour following large losses: A natural experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 121-131.
    36. Stigler, George J & Becker, Gary S, 1977. "De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 76-90, March.
    37. Salvatore Di Falco & Ferdinand M Vieider, 2022. "Environmental Adaptation of Risk Preferences," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2737-2766.
    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. Dong, Kangyin & Yang, Senmiao & Wang, Jianda & Nepal, Rabindra & Jamasb, Tooraj, 2024. "Does Geopolitical Risk Accelerate Climate Vulnerability? New Evidence from the European Green Deal," Working Papers 15-2024, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.

    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. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2021. "Shocks and Stability of Risk Preferences," CLTS Working Papers 5/21, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
    2. Kettlewell, Nathan, 2019. "Risk preference dynamics around life events," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 66-84.
    3. Freudenreich, Hanna & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Experience of losses and aversion to uncertainty - experimental evidence from farmers in Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    4. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2023. "Numeracy Skills, Decision Errors, and Risk Preference Estimation," CLTS Working Papers 5/23, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
    5. Nicholas Ingwersen & Elizabeth Frankenberg & Duncan Thomas, 2023. "Evolution of Risk Aversion over Five Years after a Major Natural Disaster," NBER Working Papers 31102, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Freudenreich, Hanna & Musshoff, Oliver & Wiercinski, Ben, 2017. "The Relationship between Farmers' Shock Experiences and their Uncertainty Preferences - Experimental Evidence from Mexico," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 256212, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    7. Ingwersen, Nicholas & Frankenberg, Elizabeth & Thomas, Duncan, 2023. "Evolution of risk aversion over five years after a major natural disaster," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    8. Goytom Abraha Kahsay & Daniel Osberghaus, 2018. "Storm Damage and Risk Preferences: Panel Evidence from Germany," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 301-318, September.
    9. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2022. "On the stability of risk and time preferences amid the COVID-19 pandemic," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 759-794, June.
    10. Arnaud Reynaud & Cécile Aubert, 2020. "Does flood experience modify risk preferences? Evidence from an artefactual field experiment in Vietnam," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 45(1), pages 36-74, March.
    11. Mickael Beaud & Marc Willinger, 2015. "Are People Risk Vulnerable?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(3), pages 624-636, March.
    12. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:745-767 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Sepahvand, Mohammad H & Shahbazian, Roujman & Bali Swain, Ranjula, 2018. "Does revolution change risk attitudes? Evidence from Burkina Faso," Working Paper Series 2019:2, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:745-767 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Magnusson, Leandro M. & Roth, Sebastian, 2024. "Trust, risk, and gender: Evidence from the Black Saturday Fires in Victoria, Australia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 223(C), pages 21-39.
    16. Lohmann, Paul M. & Gsottbauer, Elisabeth & You, Jing & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2023. "Anti-social behaviour and economic decision-making: Panel experimental evidence in the wake of COVID-19," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 136-171.
    17. Delphine Boutin & Laurène Petifour & Haris Megzari, 2022. "Instability of preferences due to Covid-19 Crisis and emotions: a natural experiment from urban Burkina Faso," Working Papers hal-03623601, HAL.
    18. Sabine Liebenehm & Ingmar Schumacher & Eric Strobl, 2024. "Rainfall shocks and risk aversion: Evidence from Southeast Asia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(1), pages 145-176, January.
    19. Kettlewell, Nathan & Rijsdijk, Fruhling & Siribaddana, Sisira & Sumathipala, Athula & Tymula, Agnieszka & Zavos, Helena & Glozier, Nicholas, 2018. "Civil War, Natural Disaster and Risk Preferences: Evidence from Sri Lankan Twins," IZA Discussion Papers 11901, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Liebenehm, Sabine & Degener, Nele & Strobl, Eric, 2018. "Rainfall shocks and risk aversion: Evidence from Southeast Asia," TVSEP Working Papers wp-006, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute for Environmental Economics and World Trade, Project TVSEP.
    21. Delphine BOUTIN & Laurène PETIFOUR & Haris MEGZARI, 2022. "Instability of preferences due to Covid-19 Crisis and emotions: a natural experiment from urban Burkina Faso," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2022-05, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    22. Jetter, Michael & Magnusson, Leandro M. & Roth, Sebastian, 2020. "Becoming sensitive: Males’ risk and time preferences after the 2008 financial crisis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Covariate shocks; Idiosyncratic shocks; Stability of risk preference parameters; Field experiment; Ethiopia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:hhs:nlsclt:2023_003. 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: Sarah Ephrida Tione (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ioumbno.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.