12 thus we have with or 20 000 without insurance

This preview shows page 12 - 15 out of 29 pages.

12
Thus we have Wealth = $15 , 000 with insurance $10 , 000 or $20 , 000 without insurance We know that a risk-averse individual has a convex utility function. Let us graph a convex utility function to show that a risk-averse individual prefers insurance. (Refer to Figure 3 in part (b)). b) Suppose two types of insurance policies were available: a fair policy covering the complete loss; and a fair policy covering only half of any loss incurred. Calculate the cost of the second type of policy and show that the individual will generally regard it as inferior to the first.
e. Ms. Fogg is planning an around-the-world trip on which she plans to spend $10,000. The utility from the trip is a function of how much she actually spends on it ( Y ), given by U ( Y ) = lnY 13
a) If there is a 25 percent probability that Ms. Fogg will lose $1,000 of her cash on the trip, what is the trip’s expected utility?
b) Suppose that Ms. Fogg can buy insurance against losing the $1,000 (say, by purchasing traveler’s checks) at an “actuarially fair” premium of $250. Show that her expected utility is higher if she purchases this insurance than if she faces the chance of losing the $1,000 without insurance.
c) What is the maximum amount that Ms. Fogg would be willing to pay to insure her $1,000?
f. For the CRRA utility function (Equation 7.42), we showed that the degree of risk aversion is measured by (1 - R ). In Chapter 3 we showed that the elasticity of substitution for the same function is given by 1 (1 - R ) Hence the measures are reciprocals of each other. Using this result, discuss the following questions. a) Why is risk aversion related to an individual’s willingness to substitute wealth between states of the world? What phenomenon is being captured by both concepts?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture