183
T I M E D I S C O U N T I N G
Models That Enrich the Instantaneous-Utility Function
Many discounting anomalies, especially those discussed earlier, can be under-
stood as a misspecification of the instantaneous-utility function. Similarly, many
of the confounds discussed in the section on measuring time discounting are
caused by researchers attributing to the discount rate aspects of preference that are
more appropriately considered as arguments in the instantaneous utility function.
As a result, alternative models of intertemporal choice have been advanced that
add additional arguments, such as utility from anticipation, to the instantaneous-
utility function.
HABIT-FORMATION MODELS
James Duesenberry (1952) was the first economist to propose the idea of “habit
formation”—that the utility from current consumption (“tastes”) can be affected
by the level of past consumption. This idea was more formally developed by
Pollak (1970) and Ryder and Heal (1973). In habit-formation models, the period-
t
instantaneous utility function takes the form
u
(
c
t
,
c
t
2
1
,
c
t
2
2
, . . .) where
2
u
/
c
t
c
t
9
.
0 for
t
9 ,
t
. For simplicity, most such models assume that all ef-
fects of past consumption for current utility enter through a state variable. That is,
they assume that period-
t
instantaneous-utility function takes the form
u
(
c
t
;
z
t
),
where
z
t
is a state variable that is increasing in past consumption and
2
/
c
t
z
t
9
.
0. Both Pollak (1970) and Ryder and Heal (1973) assume that
z
t
is
the exponentially weighted sum of past consumption, or
Although habit formation is often said to induce a preference for an increasing
consumption profile, it can, under some circumstances, lead a person to prefer a
decreasing or even nonmonotonic consumption profile. The direction of the effect
depends on things such as how much one has already consumed (as reflected in
the initial habit stock), and perhaps most important, whether current consumption
increases or decreases future utility.
In recent years, habit-formation models have been used to analyze a variety of
phenomena. Becker and Murphy (1988) use a habit-formation model to study ad-
dictive activities, and in particular to examine the effects of past and future prices
on the current consumption of addictive products.
21
Habit formation can help ex-
plain asset-pricing anomalies such as the equity-premium puzzle (Abel 1990;
Campbell and Cochrane 1999; Constantinides 1990). Incorporating habit forma-
tion into business-cycle models can improve their ability to explain movements in
asset prices (Jermann 1998; Boldrin, Christiano, and Fisher 2001). Some recent
z
ã
c
i
i
i
τ
τ
=
−
=
∞
∑
1
.
21
For rational-choice models building on Becker and Murphy’s framework see Orphanides and
Zervos (1995); Wang (1997); and Suranovic, Gold-farb, and Leonard (1999). For addiction models
that incorporate hyperbolic discounting see O’Donoghue and Rabin (1999a, 2000); Gruber and
Koszegi (2000); and Carrillo (1999).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |