H23 Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (2)
Document Type
- Working Paper (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Hauptkomponentenanalyse (1)
- Meritocracy (1)
- Principal Component Analysis (1)
- Risikobegrenzung (1)
- Risikokapitalallokation (1)
- Risikokommunikation (1)
- Risk capital allocation (1)
- Risk communication (1)
- Risk limiting (1)
- Scenario analysis (1)
- Szenarioanalyse (1)
- attitudes towards inequality (1)
- counterfactual thinking (1)
- fairness (1)
- inference (1)
- redistribution (1)
- responsibility (1)
- social preferences (1)
- uncertainty (1)
Gradient capital allocation, also known as Euler allocation, is a technique used to redistribute diversified capital requirements among different segments of a portfolio. The method is commonly employed to identify dominant risks, assessing the risk-adjusted profitability of segments, and installing limit systems. However, capital allocation can be misleading in all these applications because it only accounts for the current portfolio composition and ignores how diversification effects may change with a portfolio restructuring. This paper proposes enhancing the gradient capital allocation by adding “orthogonal convexity scenarios” (OCS). OCS identify risk concentrations that potentially drive portfolio risk and become relevant after restructuring. OCS have strong ties with principal component analysis (PCA), but they are a more general concept and compatible with common empirical patterns of risk drivers being fat-tailed and increasingly dependent in market downturns. We illustrate possible applications of OCS in terms of risk communication and risk limits.
Shallow meritocracy
(2023)
Meritocracies aspire to reward hard work and promise not to judge individuals by the circumstances into which they were born. However, circumstances often shape the choice to work hard. I show that people's merit judgments are "shallow" and insensitive to this effect. They hold others responsible for their choices, even if these choices have been shaped by unequal circumstances. In an experiment, US participants judge how much money workers deserve for the effort they exert. Unequal circumstances disadvantage some workers and discourage them from working hard. Nonetheless, participants reward the effort of disadvantaged and advantaged workers identically, regardless of the circumstances under which choices are made. For some participants, this reflects their fundamental view regarding fair rewards. For others, the neglect results from the uncertain counterfactual. They understand that circumstances shape choices but do not correct for this because the counterfactual—what would have happened under equal circumstances—remains uncertain.