Abstract
In this article we analyze the risk attitude of a group of heterogeneous agents and we develop a theory of comparative collective risk tolerance. In particular, we characterize how shifts in the distribution of individual levels of risk tolerance affect the group’s attitude towards risk. In a model with efficient risk-sharing and two agents an increase in the level of risk tolerance of one or of both agents might have an ambiguous impact on the collective level of risk tolerance; the latter increases for some levels of aggregate wealth while it decreases for other levels of aggregate wealth. For more general populations we characterize the effect of first-order like shifts (individual levels of risk tolerance more concentrated on high values) and second-order like shifts (more dispersion on individual levels of risk tolerance) on the collective level of risk tolerance. We also evaluate how shifts in the distribution of individual levels of risk tolerance impact the collective level of risk tolerance in a framework with exogenous egalitarian sharing rules. Our results permit to better characterize differences in risk taking behavior between groups and individuals and among groups with different distributions of risk preferences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arrow KJ (1971) Essays in the theory of risk-bearing. North-Holland, Amsterdam
Baker R, Laury S, Williams A (2008) Comparing small-group and individual behavior in lottery-choice experiments. South Econ J 75: 367–382
Barsky RB, Juster FT, Kimball MS, Shapiro MD (1997) Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: an experimental approach in the health and retirement study. Quart J Econ 112: 537–579
Bone J, Hey J, Suckling J (1999) Are groups more (or less) consistent than individuals?. J Risk Uncertain 18: 63–81
Charness G, Karni E, Levin D (2007) Individual and group decision making under risk: an experimental study of Bayesian updating and violations of first-order stochastic dominance. J Risk Uncertain 35: 129–148
Clark R (1971) Group induced shift toward risk: a critical appraisal. Psychol Bull 76: 251–270
Eliaz K, Ray D, Razin R (2006) Choice shifts in groups: a decision-theoretic basis. Am Econ Rev 96: 1321–1332
Gollier C (1997) A note on portfolio dominance. Rev Econ Stud 64: 147–150
Gollier C (2001) Wealth inequality and asset pricing. Rev Econ Stud 68: 181–203
Gollier C (2007) Whom should we believe? Aggregation and heterogeneous beliefs. J Risk Uncertain 35: 107–127
Hara C, Huang J, Kuzmics C (2007) Representative consumer’s risk aversion and efficient risk-sharing rules. J Econ Theory 137: 652–672
Jouini E, Napp C (2008) On Abel’s concept of doubt and pessimism. J Econ Dyn Control 32: 3682–3694
Landsberger M, Meilijson I (1990) Demand for risky financial assets: a portfolio analysis. J Econ Theory 50: 204–213
Masclet D, Colombier N, Denant-Boemont L, Loheac Y (2009) Group and individual risk preferences: a lottery-choice experiment with self-employed and salaried workers. J Econ Behav Organ 70: 470–484
Mazzocco M (2004) Savings, risk sharing and preferences for risk. Am Econ Rev 94: 1169–1182
Pratt JW (1964) Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica 32: 122–136
Pratt JW, Zeckhauser RJ (1989) The impact of risk sharing on efficient decision. J Risk Uncertain 2: 219–234
Samuelson PA (1956) Social indifference curves. Quart J Econ 70: 1–22
Shupp R, Williams A (2008) Risk preference differentials of small groups and individuals. Econ J 118: 258–283
Wilson R (1968) The theory of syndicates. Econometrica 36: 119–132
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jouini, E., Napp, C. & Nocetti, D. Collective risk aversion. Soc Choice Welf 40, 411–437 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0611-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0611-9