Essays on Risk Aversion, Diversification and Non-Participation

My dissertation consists of three essays. The central theme of these essays is the psychological factors and biases that affect the portfolio allocation decision. The first essay entitled, “Are women more risk-averse than men?” examines the gender difference in risk aversion as revealed by actual investment choices. Using a sample that controls for biases in the level of education and finance knowledge, there is evidence that when individuals have the same level of education, irrespective of their knowledge of finance, women are no more risk-averse than their male counterparts. However, the gender-risk aversion relation is also a function of age, income, wealth, marital status, race/ethnicity and the number of children in the household. The second essay entitled, “Can diversification be learned?” investigates if investors who have superior investment knowledge are more likely to actively seek diversification benefits and are less prone to allocation biases. Results of cross-sectional analyses suggest that knowledge of finance increases the likelihood that an investor will efficiently allocate his direct investments across the major asset classes; invest in foreign assets; and hold a diversified equity portfolio. However, there is no evidence that investors who are more financially sophisticated make superior allocation decisions in their retirement savings. The final essay entitled, “The demographics of non-participation”, examines the factors that affect the decision not to hold stocks. The results of probit regression models indicate that when individuals are highly educated, the decision to not participate in the stock market is less related to demographic factors. In particular, when individuals have attained at least a college degree and have advanced knowledge of finance, they are significantly more likely to invest in equities either directly or indirectly through mutual funds or their retirement savings. There is also evidence that the decision not to hold stocks is motivated by short-term market expectations and the most recent investment experience. The findings of these essays should increase the body of research that seeks to reconcile what investors actually do (positive theory) with what traditional theories of finance predict that investors should do (normative theory).

Essays on Emissions Trading Markets

This dissertation is a collection of three economics essays on different aspects of carbon emission trading markets. The first essay analyzes the dynamic optimal emission control strategies of two nations. With a potential to become the largest buyer under the Kyoto Protocol, the US is assumed to be a monopsony, whereas with a large number of tradable permits on hand Russia is assumed to be a monopoly. Optimal costs of emission control programs are estimated for both the countries under four different market scenarios: non-cooperative no trade, US monopsony, Russia monopoly, and cooperative trading. The US monopsony scenario is found to be the most Pareto cost efficient. The Pareto efficient outcome, however, would require the US to make side payments to Russia, which will even out the differences in the cost savings from cooperative behavior. The second essay analyzes the price dynamics of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), a voluntary emissions trading market. By examining the volatility in market returns using AR-GARCH and Markov switching models, the study associates the market price fluctuations with two different political regimes of the US government. Further, the study also identifies a high volatility in the returns few months before the market collapse. Three possible regulatory and market-based forces are identified as probable causes of market volatility and its ultimate collapse. Organizers of other voluntary markets in the US and worldwide may closely watch for these regime switching forces in order to overcome emission market crashes. The third essay compares excess skewness and kurtosis in carbon prices between CCX and EU ETS (European Union Emission Trading Scheme) Phase I and II markets, by examining the tail behavior when market expectations exceed the threshold level. Dynamic extreme value theory is used to find out the mean price exceedence of the threshold levels and estimate the risk loss. The calculated risk measures suggest that CCX and EU ETS Phase I are extremely immature markets for a risk investor, whereas EU ETS Phase II is a more stable market that could develop as a mature carbon market in future years.