To read this content please select one of the options below:

Risk level and inequality preference

Inequality and Opportunity: Papers from the Second ECINEQ Society Meeting

ISBN: 978-1-84855-134-3, eISBN: 978-1-84855-135-0

Publication date: 15 October 2008

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether inequality aversion is influenced by the risk level. Recently empirical evidence points to deviations from selfish behavior of Homo economicus. Thus, people are not motivated solely by their own monetary payoffs, but are also concerned about issues of equality and fairness. This paper distinguishes between inequality aversion and risk aversion and discusses whether the level of risk affects these motivations.

Design: In an experimental framework the attitude toward inequality is separated from the attitude toward risk. A risky environment is generated by a set of lotteries. The subjects had to determine the method for payment, equally (CG) or nonequally (IG), for three lotteries with different levels of risk. The inequality preferences are measured by the level of the selected probability for CG.

Findings: The main finding of this paper is that preferences for inequality are influenced by level of risk. We found that aversion to inequality was stronger when the level of risk was higher. In the low and medium risk lotteries participants preferred the individual gamble – the nonegalitarian method. Only in the high-risk lottery the participants preferred the common gamble that assured them equal payments.

Originality/value: The paper distinguishes between inequality aversion and risk aversion and subjects are allowed to trade one off against the other. Thus, it contributes to the understanding of the interrelationship between income inequality and risk.

Citation

Davidovitz, L. (2008), "Risk level and inequality preference", Bishop, J. and Zheng, B. (Ed.) Inequality and Opportunity: Papers from the Second ECINEQ Society Meeting (Research on Economic Inequality, Vol. 16), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 323-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1049-2585(08)16014-8

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2008, Emerald Group Publishing Limited