Decomposing social risk preferences for health and wealth

Arthur E. Attema*, Olivier L'Haridon, Gijs van de Kuilen

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)


This study reports the results of the first artefactual field experiment designed to measure the prevalence of aversion toward different components of social risks in a large and demographically representative sample. We identify social risk preferences for health and wealth for losses and gains, and decompose these attitudes into four different dimensions: individual risk, collective risk, ex-post inequality, and ex-ante inequality. The results of a non-parametric analysis suggest that aversion to risk and inequality is the mean preference for outcomes in health and wealth in the domain of gains and losses. A parametric decomposition of aversion to risk and inequality shows that respondents are averse to ex-post and ex-ante inequality in health and wealth for gains and losses. Likewise, respondents are averse to collective risk, but neutral to individual risk, which highlights the importance of considering different components of social risk preferences when managing social health and wealth risks.

Original languageEnglish
Article number102757
Number of pages18
JournalJournal of Health Economics
Early online date8 Apr 2023
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2023

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
In this paper we make use of data of the LISS (Longitudinal Internet studies for the Social Sciences) panel administered by Centerdata (Tilburg University, The Netherlands). We thank Fabrice Etilé, Noemi Navarro, and seminar participants at Aix-Marseille School of Economics, Durham Business School, Erasmus University, FUR and Paris School of Economics for helpful comments on previous versions of the manuscript.

JEL classification:
D90, I10

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Author(s)


Dive into the research topics of 'Decomposing social risk preferences for health and wealth'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this