“How powerful is demography? The serendipity theorem revisited” comment on De la Croix et al. (2012)
Tóm tắt
Samuelson’s (Int Econ Rev 16(3):531-538, 1975) serendipity theorem states that the “goldenest golden rule” steady-state equilibrium can be obtained by a competitive two-period overlapping generation economy with capital accumulation, provided that the optimal growth rate prevails. De la Croix et al. (J Popul Econ 25:899-922, 2012) extended the scope of the theorem by showing that it also holds for risky lifetime. With this note, we introduce medical expenditure as a determinant of the probability of surviving to old age to prove the theorem. The original as well as all extended versions of the serendipity theorem, however, fail to prove that second-order conditions are satisfied in general. Still, unlike De la Croix et al. (J Popul Econ 25:899-922, 2012), we can exclude the existence of corner solutions where the probability of reaching old age is zero or one. The zero survival probability case becomes irrelevant if the option to randomize between death and life utility is taken into account. Survival with certainty is ruled out if the marginal cost of survival is increasing. Hence, the optimal survival probability represents an interior solution. Furthermore, we show for the optimal survival probability that the value of a statistical life is positive and equal to its marginal cost.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Abio G (2003) Interiority of the optimal population growth rate with endogenous fertility. Econ Bull 10(4):1–7
Chakraborty S (2004) Endogenous lifetime and economic growth. J Econ Theory 116:119–137
De la Croix D, Ponthière G (2010) On the golden rule of capital accumulation under endogenous longevity. Math Soc Sci 59(2):227–238
De la Croix D, Pestieau P, Ponthière G (2012) How powerful is demography? The serendipity theorem revisited. J Popul Econ 25:899–922
Deardorff AV (1976) The optimum growth rate for population: comment. Int Econ Rev 17(2):510–515
Felder S, Mayrhofer T (2011) Medical decision making: a health economic primer. Springer, Heidelberg
Hall RE, Jones CI (2007) The value of life and the rise in health spending. Q J Econ 122(1):39–72
Jaeger K, Kuhle W (2009) The optimum growth rate for population reconsidered. J Popul Econ 22(1):23–41
Michel P, Pestieau P (1993) Population growth and optimality: when does the serendipity theorem hold? J Popul Econ 6(4):353–362
Murphy KM, Topel RH (2006) The value of health and longevity. J Polit Econ 114(5):871–904
OECD (2014) Health statistics. Paris
Rosen S (1988) The value of changes in life expectancy. J Risk Uncertain 1:285–304
Samuelson PA (1958) An exact consumption-loan model of interest with or without the social contrivance of money. J Polit Econ 66(6):467–482
Samuelson PA (1975) The optimum growth rate for population. Int Econ Rev 16(3):531–538
Schweizer U (1996) Endogenous fertility and the Henry George theorem. J Publ Econ 61:209–228
Viscusi WK, Aldy JE (2003) The value of saving a life: a critical review of market estimates throughout the world. J Risk Uncertain 27(1):5–76