A note on greater downside risk aversion

This paper characterizes downside risk aversion in a simple and intuitive manner. It is shown that using this characterization one can simplify considerably a theorem by Jindapon (2010) relating to greater downside risk aversion as measured by the prudence probability premium. The comparative statics of downside risk aversion in risk-free wealth are also considered.downside risk aversion, prudence

Optimal Pricing and Quality of Academic Journals and the Ambiguous Welfare Effects of Forced Open Access: A Two-sided Model

We analyse optimal pricing and quality of a monopolistic journal and the optimality of open access in a two-sided model. The predominant aspect of the model that determines the quality levels at which open access is optimal is the nature of the (non-linear) externalities between readers and authors in a journal. We show that there exist scenarios in which open access is a feature of high-quality journals. Besides, we find that the removal of copyright (and thus forced open access) will likely increase both readership and authorship, will decrease journal profits, and may increase social welfare

Copyright and Open Access for Academic Works

In a recent paper, Prof. Steven Shavell (see Shavell, 2009) has argued strongly in favor of eliminating copyright from academic works. Based upon solid economic arguments, Shavell analyses the pros and cons of removal of copyright and in its place to have a pure open access system, in which authors (or more likely their employers) would provide the funds that keep journals in business. In this paper we explore some of the arguments in Shavell’s paper, above all the way in which the distribution of the sources of journal revenue would be altered, and the feasible effects upon the quality of journal content. We propose a slight modification to a pure open access system which may provide for the best of both the copyright and open access worlds.Open Access, Academic Works, Effects of Removal of Copyrights

A Note on the Intensity of Downside Risk Aversion

In this note we show that the measure of intensity of downside risk aversion proposed recently by Crainich and Eeckhoudt (2007) cannot be guaranteed to exist. We do this by means of an example in which the existence of the measure depends upon the values of the parameters in the problem.risk aversion, prudence, downside risk