Expected utility or prospect theory maximisers? Assessing farmers' risk behaviour from field-experiment data

Géraldine Bocquého, Florence Jacquet and Arnaud Reynaud
Additional contact information
Florence Jacquet: UMR MOISA - Marchés, Organisations, Institutions et Stratégies d'Acteurs - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - Montpellier SupAgro - Centre international d'études supérieures en sciences agronomiques - CIHEAM-IAMM - Centre International de Hautes Etudes Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - Institut Agronomique Méditerranéen de Montpellier - CIHEAM - Centre International de Hautes Études Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: We elicit the risk preferences of a sample of French farmers in a field-experiment setting, considering both expected utility and cumulative prospect theory. Under the EU framework, our results show that farmers are characterised by a concave utility function for gain outcomes implying risk aversion. The CPT framework confirms this result, but also suggests that farmers are twice as sensitive to losses as to gains and tend to pay undue attention to unlikely extreme outcomes. Accounting for loss aversion and probability weighting can make a difference in the design of effective and efficient policies, contracts or insurance schemes.

Keywords: risk preferences; experimental economics; loss aversion; probability weighting; france (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (68)

Published in European Review of Agricultural Economics, 2014, 41 (1), pp.135-172. ⟨10.1093/erae/jbt006⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
Journal Article: Expected utility or prospect theory maximisers? Assessing farmers' risk behaviour from field-experiment data (2014)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01000072

DOI: 10.1093/erae/jbt006

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().