Post on 01-Jan-2016
description
1
Economics 331b
Treatment of Uncertaintyin Economics (I)
This week
1. Dynamic deterministic systems2. Dynamic stochastic systems3. Optimization (decision making) under
uncertainty4. Uncertainty and learning5. Uncertainty with extreme distributions (“fat
tails”)
2
Deterministic dynamic systems (no uncertainty)
Consider a dynamic system:
(1)yt = H(θt , μt )
where yt = endogenous variables
θt = exogenous variables and parameters
μt = control variables
H = function or mapping.
3
4
0
20
40
60
80
100
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
ExampleAge of Ronald Reagan (years)
Deterministic optimization
Often we have an objective function U(yt ) and want to
optimize, as in
max ∫ U(yt )e-ρt dt
{μ(t)}
Subject to yt = H(θt , μt )
As in the optimal growth (Ramsey) model or life-cycle model of consumption.
5
Mankiw, Life Cycle Model, Chapter 17
6
Stochastic dynamic systems (with uncertainty)
Same system:
(1)yt = H(θt , μt )
θt = random exogenous variables or parameters
Examples of stochastic dynamic systems? Help?
7
Which is stock market and random walk?
8
2,000
1,000
700500
300
200
100
7050
30
20
1055 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05 10
RANDFSP FSPCOMT=year 0 T=year 60
Examples: stock market and random walk
9
2,000
1,000
700500
300
200
100
7050
30
20
1055 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05 10
RANDFSP FSPCOM
Randomwalk
US stock market
How can we model this with modern techniques?
10
Methodology is “Monte Carlo” technique, like spinning a bunch of roulette wheels at Monte Carlo
11
How can we model this with modern techniques?
Methodology is “Monte Carlo” technique, like spinning a bunch of roulette wheels at Monte Carlo
System is:
(1)yt = H(θt , μt )
So,
• You first you find the probability distribution f(θt ).
• Then you simulate (1) with n draws from f(θt ).
• This then produces a distribution, g(yt ).
12
How can we model this with modern techniques?
YEcon Model
An example showing how the results are affected if we make temperature sensitivity a normal random variable N(3, 1.5).
13
14
50 random runs from RICE model for Temp
15
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
2005 2055 2105 2155 2205 2255
Temperature 2100
16
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Series: Temperature 2100Observations 1000
Mean 3.28Median 3.26Maximum 5.953Minimum 1.267
Temperature degC above 1900
How do we choose?
• We have all these runs, ytI , yt
II , ytIII ,…
• For this, we use expected utility theory.
max ∫ E[U(yt )]e-ρt dt
Subject to yt = H(θt , μt ) and with μt as control variable.
• We usually assume U( . ) shows risk aversion.
• This produces an optimal policy.
17
SCC 2015
18
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
0.0 12.5 25.0 37.5 50.0 62.5 75.0 87.5 100.0
Series: SCC 2005$ per ton CO2 Observations 999
Mean 11.07505Median 8.612833Maximum 98.66368Minimum 1.157029Std. Dev. 9.028558
So, not much difference between mean and best guess. So we can ignore uncertainty (to first approximation.)
Or can we?
What is dreadfully wrong with this story?
What is dreadfully wrong with this story?
The next slide will help us think through why it is wrong and how to fix it.
It is an example of – 2 states of the world (good and bad with p=0.9 and
0.1),– and two potential policies (strong and weak),– and payoffs in terms of losses (in % of baseline
utility or income).
19
The payoff matrix (in utility units)
20
The state of the environmental world
Good outcome (low damage, many green technologies)
Poor outcome (catastrophic damage, no green technologies)
Climate
Strong policies (high carbon tax, cooperation, R&D) -1% -1%
policyWeak policies (no carbon tax, strife, corruption) 0% -50%
Probability 90% 10%