Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

A farmer believes there is a \(50-50\) chance that the next growing season will be abnormally rainy. His expected utility function has the form \\[ \text { expected utility }=\frac{1}{2} \ln Y_{N R}+\frac{1}{2} \ln Y_{R} \\] where \(Y_{N R}\) and \(Y_{R}\) represent the farmer's income in the states of "normal rain" and "rainy," respectively. a. Suppose the farmer must choose between two crops that promise the following income prospects: $$\begin{array}{lcc} \text { Crop } & \boldsymbol{Y}_{N R} & \boldsymbol{Y}_{R} \\ \hline \text { Wheat } & \$ 28,000 & \$ 10,000 \\ \text { Corn } & 19,000 & 15,000 \end{array}$$ Which of the crops will he plant? b. Suppose the farmer can plant half his field with each crop. Would he choose to do so? Explain your result. c. What mix of wheat and corn would provide maximum expected utility to this farmer? d. Would wheat crop insurance, available to farmers who grow only wheat, which costs \(\$ 4000\) and pays off \(\$ 8000\) in the event of a rainy growing season, cause this farmer to change what he plants?

Short Answer

Expert verified
Answer: Based on the income prospects, the farmer should plant corn, as it has a higher expected utility (8.8392) than wheat (8.6385). However, if the farmer decides to buy wheat crop insurance, the expected utility of insured wheat increases to 9.0009, making it a better choice than corn. In this case, the farmer would choose to plant insured wheat only.

Step by step solution

01

a. Determining which crop to plant

For the farmer to choose between wheat and corn, we need to calculate the expected utility for each. We will use the given function: \[ \text { expected utility }=\frac{1}{2} \ln Y_{N R}+\frac{1}{2} \ln Y_{R} \] For wheat: \[ \text { expected utility (wheat) } = \frac{1}{2} \ln 28000 + \frac{1}{2} \ln 10000 \] For corn: \[ \text { expected utility (corn) } = \frac{1}{2} \ln 19000 + \frac{1}{2} \ln 15000 \] Calculate the values: \[ \text { expected utility (wheat) } \approx 8.6385 \] \[ \text { expected utility (corn) } \approx 8.8392 \] Since the expected utility of corn is higher, the farmer should choose to plant corn.
02

b. Evaluating a mix of both crops

If the farmer plants half wheat and half corn, the incomes for each weather condition would be: \[ Y_{N R} = 0.5 * 28000 + 0.5 * 19000 = 23500 \] \[ Y_{R} = 0.5 * 10000 + 0.5 * 15000 = 12500 \] Now, we calculate the expected utility for this 50-50 mix: \[ \text { expected utility (50-50 mix) } = \frac{1}{2} \ln 23500 + \frac{1}{2} \ln 12500 \approx 8.8253 \] The expected utility of the 50-50 mix (8.8253) is less than that of corn (8.8392); thus, it would not be a better choice for the farmer.
03

c. Determining the optimal crop mix

Let \(x\) represent the proportion of the wheat crop, and \((1-x)\) represent the proportion of corn. Then, we get: \[ Y_{N R} = x * 28000 + (1-x) * 19000 \] \[ Y_{R} = x * 10000 + (1-x) * 15000 \] The expected utility function becomes: \[ f(x) = \frac{1}{2} \ln (28000x + 19000 - 9000x) + \frac{1}{2} \ln (10000x + 5000 - 5000x) \] To find the maximum, we need to find the critical points of this function by taking its derivative and setting it to zero: \[ f'(x) = \frac{d f(x)}{d x} = \frac{19000 - 9000}{2(28000x + 19000 - 9000x)} - \frac{5000 - 5000x}{2(10000x + 5000 - 5000x )} \] Solving \(f'(x) = 0\) for \(x\); we get that: \(x \approx 0.5963\). In other words, the optimal mix consists of about 59.63% wheat and 40.37% corn.
04

d. The impact of crop insurance

With wheat crop insurance, a cost of \(4000 will be deducted from the income in the normal rain scenario, and the payout of \)8000 will be added in the event of a rainy season: For insured wheat: \[ Y_{N R (Insured Wheat)} = 28000 - 4000 = 24000 \] \[ Y_{R (Insured Wheat)} = 10000 + 8000 = 18000 \] Calculate the expected utility for insured wheat: \[ \text { expected utility (insured wheat) } = \frac{1}{2} \ln 24000 + \frac{1}{2} \ln 18000 \approx 9.0009 \] Since the expected utility of insured wheat (9.0009) is higher than that of corn (8.8392), the farmer would now choose to plant insured wheat only.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

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)=\ln Y \\] a. If there is a 25 percent probability that Ms. Fogg will lose \(\$ 1000\) of her cash on the trip, what is the trip's expected utility? b. Suppose that Ms. Fogg can buy insurance against losing the \(\$ 1000\) (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 \(\$ 1000\) without insurance. c. What is the maximum amount that Ms. Fogg would be willing to pay to insure her \(\$ 1000 ?\)

Show that if an individual's utility-of-wealth function is convex (rather than concave, as shown in Figure 8.1 ), he or she will prefer fair gambles to income certainty and may even be willing to accept somewhat unfair gambles. Do you believe this sort of risk-taking behavior is common? What factors might tend to limit its occurrence?

An individual purchases a dozen eggs and must take them home. Although making trips home is costless, there is a 50 percent chance that all of the eggs carried on any one trip will be broken during the trip. The individual considers two strategies: Strategy 1: Take all 12 eggs in one trip. Strategy 2: Take two trips with 6 in each trip. a. List the possible outcomes of each strategy and the probabilities of these outcomes. Show that on the average, 6 eggs will remain unbroken after the trip home under either strategy. b. Develop a graph to show the utility obtainable under each strategy. Which strategy will be preferable? c. Could utility be improved further by taking more than two trips? How would this possibility be affected if additional trips were costly?

Investment in risky assets can be examined in the state-preference framework by assuming that \(W^{*}\) dollars invested in an asset with a certain return, \(r,\) will yield \(W^{*}(1+r)\) in both states of the world, whereas investment in a risky asset will yield \(W^{*}\left(1+r_{\mathrm{g}}\right)\) in good times and \(\left.W^{*}\left(1+r_{b}\right) \text { in bad times (where } r_{g}>r>r_{b}\right)\) a. Graph the outcomes from the two investments. b. Show how a "mxied portfolio" containing both risk-free and risky assets could be illustrated in your graph. How would you show the fraction of wealth invested in the risky asset? c. Show how individuals' attitudes toward risk will determine the mix of risk- free and risky assets they will hold. In what case would a person hold no risky assets? d. If an individual's utility takes the constant relative risk aversion form (Equation 8.62 ), explain why this person will not change the fraction of risky asset held as his or her wealth increases. \(^{20}\)

For the constant relative risk aversion utility function (Equation 8.62 ) 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? b. How would you interpret the polar cases \(R=1\) and \(R=-\infty\) in both the risk-aversion and substitution frameworks? c. A rise in the price of contingent claims in "bad" times \(\left(P_{b}\right)\) will induce substitution and income effects into the demands for \(W_{g}\) and \(W_{b} .\) If the individual has a fixed budget to devote to these two goods, how will choices among them be affected? Why might \(W_{g}\) rise or fall depending on the degree of risk aversion exhibited by the individual? d. Suppose that empirical data suggest an individual requires an average return of 0.5 percent if he or she is to be tempted to invest in an investment that has a \(50-50\) chance of gaining or losing 5 percent. That is, this person gets the same utility from \(W_{0}\) as from an even bet on \(1.055 W_{0}\) and \(0.955 W_{0}\) i. What value of \(R\) is consistent with this behavior? ii. How much average return would this person require to accept a \(50-50\) chance of gaining or losing 10 percent? Note: This part requires solving nonlinear equations, so approximate solutions will suffice. The comparison of the risk/reward trade-off illustrates what is called the "equity premium puzzle," in that risky investments seem to actually earn much more than is consistent with the degree of risk-aversion suggested by other data. See N. R. Kocherlakota, "The Equity Premium: It's Still a Puzzle" Journal of Economic Literature (March 1996 ): \(42-71\)

See all solutions

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free