Table 3. Saha's argument on the NLMS model
|
____DRRA |
CRRA |
_____IRRA | |
|
DARA |
θ > 1, θ > γ |
θ > 1, θ = γ |
θ > 1, θ < γ |
|
CARA |
θ=1, θ>γ |
θ=1, θ=γ |
θ=1, θ<γ |
|
IARA |
θ<1,θ>γ |
θ<1, θ=γ |
θ<1,θ<γ |
Source: Saha (1997)
Table 4. Reconsideration of the NLMS model
|
_____DRRA |
CRRA |
_____IRRA | |
|
DARA |
Not applicable |
Not applicable |
Not applicable |
|
CARA |
Not feasible |
Not feasible |
θ=1, θ<γ |
|
IARA |
Not feasible |
Not feasible |
θ<1,1≤γ |
Table 5. Form (15) and the corresponding types of risk aversion
|
_____DRRA____ |
CRRA |
_____IRRA | |
|
DARA |
Not applicable |
1 < δ = η |
1 < δ < η |
|
CARA |
Not feasible |
Not feasible |
1=δ<η |
|
IARA |
______Not feasible |
Not feasible |
Not applicable |
33
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. Does Competition Increase Economic Efficiency in Swedish County Councils?
5. Sectoral Energy- and Labour-Productivity Convergence
6. The name is absent
7. Fertility in Developing Countries
8. LIMITS OF PUBLIC POLICY EDUCATION
9. The Modified- Classroom ObservationScheduletoMeasureIntenticnaCommunication( M-COSMIC): EvaluationofReliabilityandValidity
10. The name is absent