Abstract
This paper introduces Knightian uncertainty and loss aversion into the hedging decision framework. Knightian uncertainty allows for imprecision in the joint density function of spot and futures prices. Loss aversion dictates that an individual is more sensitive to losses (compared to a reference point) than to gains. The optimal futures position is characterized. It is found that inertia prevails. That is, there is a wide range of parameter configurations under which the conventional one-to-one hedge strategy is optimal. Moreover, loss aversion acts to reduce any deviation from this conventional strategy.
The author is grateful to Raj Srivastava for his encouragement to pursue the current research. Elizabeth Asiedu, Raymond Leuthold, and Joseph Sicilian provided helpful comments and suggestions on earlier related work. Of course, the author is fully responsible for any omissions and commissions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Benartzi, S. and Thaler, R. H. (1995): “Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110: 75–92.
Dempster, A. P. (1967): “Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by a Multivariate Mapping,” Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 38: 325 — 339.
Dow, J. and Werlang, S. (1992): “Uncertainty Aversion, Risk Aversion, and the Optimal Choice of Portfolio,” Econometrica, 60: 197 — 204.
Epstein, L. G. and Wang, T. (1994): “Intertemporal Asset Pricing under Knightian Uncertainty,” Econometrica, 62: 283 — 322.
Kahneman, D, Knetsch, J. and Thaler, R. (1990): “Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem,” Journal of Political Economy, 98: 1325–1348.
Lence, S. G. (1995): “On the Optimal Hedge under Unbiased Futures Prices,” Economics Letters, 47: 385 — 388.
Lien, D. (1999a): “Production and Hedging under Knightian Uncertainty,” Journal of Futures Markets, forthcoming.
Lien, D. (1999b): Loss Aversion and Futures Hedging. Mimeo. University of Kansas.
Rigotti, L. (1998): Imprecise Beliefs in a Principal-Agent Model. CentER D.P. 98128, Tilburg University.
Shafer, G. (1976): A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Priceton, New Jersey.
Thaler, R., Tversky, A., Kahneman, D., and Schwartz, A. (1997): The Effect of Myopia and Loss Aversion on Risk Taking: An Experimental Test Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112: 647–661.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1992): “Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5: 297–323.
Wasserman, L. A. (1990): “Prior Envelopes Based on Belief Functions,” Annals of Statistics, 18: 454–464.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lien, D. (2002). Futures Hedging under Prospect Utility and Knightian Uncertainty. In: Srivastava, R.P., Mock, T.J. (eds) Belief Functions in Business Decisions. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 88. Physica, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1798-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1798-0_12
Publisher Name: Physica, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-2503-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-7908-1798-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive