保險(xiǎn)公司風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)

保險(xiǎn)公司風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)保險(xiǎn)公司風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)(文檔含英文原文和中文翻譯)原文：EnterpriseRiskManagementinInsuranceEnterpriseRiskManagement(hereinafterreferredas“ERM”)interestsawiderangeofprofessions(e.g.,actuaries,corporatefinancialmanagers,underwriters,accountants,andinternalauditors),however,currentERMsolutionsoftendonotcoverallrisksbecausetheyaremotivatedbythecoreprofessionalethicsandprinciplesoftheseprofessionswhodesignandadministerthem.Inatypicalinsurancecompanyallsuchprofessionsworkasagrouptoachievetheoverridingcorporateobjectives.Riskcanbedefinedasfactorswhichpreventanorganizationinachievingitsobjectivesandrisksaffectorganizationsholistically.Themanagementofriskinisolationoftenmissesitsbigpicture.Itisarguedherethataholisticmanagementofriskislogicalandistheultimatedestinationofallgeneralmanagementactivities.Moreover,riskmanagementshouldnotbeaseparatefunctionofthebusinessprocess;rather,managingdownsideriskandtakingtheopportunitiesfromupsideriskshouldbethekeymanagementgoals.Consequently,ERMisbelievedasanapproachtoriskmanagement,whichprovidesacommonunderstandingacrossthemultidisciplinarygroupsofpeopleoftheorganization.ERMshouldbeproactiveanditsfocusshouldbeontheorganizationsfuture.Organizationsoftenstruggletoseeandunderstandthefullriskspectrumtowhichtheyareexposedandasaresulttheymayfailtoidentifythemostvulnerableareasofthebusiness.Theeffectivemanagementofriskistrulyaninterdisciplinaryexercisegroundedonaholisticframework.Whatevernamethisnewtypeofriskmanagementisgiven(theliteraturereferstoitbydiversenames,suchasEnterpriseRiskManagement,StrategicRiskManagement,andHolisticRiskManagement)theultimatefocusismanagementofallsignificantrisksfacedbytheorganization.Riskisanintegralpartofeachandeveryactionoftheorganizationinthesensethatanorganizationisabasketofcontractsassociatedwithrisk(intermsoflossesandopportunities).TheideaofERMissimpleandlogical,butimplementationisdifficult.Thisisbecauseitsinvolvementwithawidestakeholdercommunity,whichinturninvolvesgroupsfromdifferentdisciplineswithdifferentbeliefsandunderstandings.Indeed,ERMneedstheories(whicharetheinterestofacademics)butagrandtheoryofERM(whichinvariablyinvolvesaninterdisciplinaryconcept)isfarfromhavingbeenachieved.Consequently,forpracticalproposes,whatisneededisthedevelopmentofaframework(asetofcompetenttheories)andoneofthekeychallengesofthisthesisistoestablishthekeyfeaturesofsuchaframeworktopromotethepracticeofERM.MultidisciplinaryViewsofRiskTheobjectiveoftheresearchistostudytheERMofinsurancecompanies.InlinewiththisitisdesignedtoinvestigatewhatishappeningpracticallyintheinsuranceindustryatthecurrenttimeinthenameofERM.Theintentionistominimizethegapbetweenthetwocommunities(i.e.,academicsandpractitioners)inordertocontributetotheliteratureofriskmanagement.InrecentyearsERMhasemergedasatopicfordiscussioninthefinancialcommunity,inparticular,thebanksandinsurancesectors.ProfessionalorganizationshavepublishedresearchreportsonERM.Consultingfirmsconductedextensivestudiesandsurveysonthetopictosupporttheirclients.RatingagenciesincludedtheERMconceptintheirratingcriteria.Regulatorsfocusedmoreontheriskmanagementcapabilityofthefinancialorganizations.Academicsareslowlyrespondingonthemanagementofriskinaholisticframeworkfollowingtheinitiativesofpractitioners.Thecentralideaistobringtheorganizationclosetothemarketeconomy.Nevertheless,everybodyispushingERMwithinthescopeoftheircoreprofessionalunderstanding.ThefocusofERMistomanageallrisksinaholisticframeworkwhateverthesourceandnature.Thereremainsastronggroundofknowledgeinmanagingriskonanisolatedbasisinseveralacademicdisciplines(e.g.,economics,finance,psychology,sociology,etc.).Butlittlehasbeendonetotakeaholisticapproachofriskbeyonddisciplinarysilos.Moreover,thetheoreticalunderstandingoftheholistic(i.e.,multidisciplinary)propertiesofriskisstillunknown.Consequently,thereremainsalackofunderstandingintermsofacommonandinterdisciplinarylanguageforERM.RiskinFinanceInfinance,riskyoptionsinvolvemonetaryoutcomeswithexplicitprobabilitiesandtheyareevaluatedintermsoftheirexpectedvalueandtheirriskiness.Thetraditionalapproachtoriskinfinanceliteratureisbasedonamean-varianceframeworkofportfoliotheory,i.e.,selectionanddiversification.Theideaofriskinfinanceisunderstoodwithinthescopeofsystematic(non-diversifiable)riskandunsystematic(diversifiable)risk.Itisrecognizedinfinancethatsystematicriskispositivelycorrelatedwiththerateofreturn.Inaddition,systematicriskisanon-increasingfunctionofafirm’sgrowthintermsofearnings.Anotherestablishedconcerninfinanceisdefaultriskanditisarguedthattheperformanceofthefirmislinkedtothefirm’sdefaultrisk.Alargepartoffinanceliteraturedealswithseveraltechniquesofmeasuringrisksoffirms’investmentportfolios(e.g.,standarddeviation,beta,VaR,etc.).Inadditiontotheportfoliotheory,CapitalAssetPricingModel(CAPM)wasdiscoveredinfinancetopriceriskyassetsontheperfectcapitalmarkets.Finally,derivativemarketsgrewtremendouslywiththerecognitionofoptionpricingtheory.RiskinEconomicsRiskineconomicsisunderstoodwithintwoseparate(independent)categories,i.e.,endogenous(controllable)riskandbackground(uncontrollable)risk.Itisrecognizedthateconomicdecisionsaremadeunderuncertaintyinthepresenceofmultiplerisks.ExpectedUtilityTheoryarguesthatpeoples’riskattitudeonthesizeofrisk(small,medium,large)isderivedfromtheutility-of-wealthfunction,wheretheutilitiesofoutcomesareweightedbytheirprobabilities.Economistsarguethatpeopleareriskaverse(neutral)whenthesizeoftherisksislarge(small).Prospecttheoryprovidesadescriptiveanalysisofchoiceunderrisk.Ineconomics,theconceptofrisk-bearingpreferencesofagentsforindependentriskswasdescribedunderthenotionof“standardriskaversion.”Mostoftheeconomicresearchonriskisoriginatedonthestudyofdecisionmakingbehavioronlotteriesandothergambles.RiskinPsychologyWhileeconomicsassumesanindividual’sriskpreferenceisafunctionofprobabilisticbeliefs,psychologyexploreshowhumanjudgmentandbehaviorsystematicallyformssuchbeliefs.Psychologytalksabouttherisktakingbehavior(riskpreferences).Itlooksforthepatternsofhumanreactionstothecontext,referencepoint,mentalcategoriesandassociationsthatinfluencehowpeoplemakedecisions.Thepsychologicalapproachtoriskdrawsuponthenotionoflossaversionthatmanifestsitselfintherelatednotionof“regret.”AccordingtoWillett;“riskaffectseconomicactivitythroughthepsychologicalinfluenceofuncertainty.”Managers’attitudeofrisktakingisoftendescribedfromthepsychologicalpointofviewintermsoffeelings.Psychologistsarguethatrisk,asamultidisciplinaryconcept,cannotbereducedmeaningfullybyasinglequantitativetreatment.Consequently,managerstendtoutilizeanarrayofriskmeasurerstoassisttheminthedecisionmakingprocessunderuncertainty.Riskperceptionplaysacentralroleinthepsychologicalresearchonrisk,wherethekeyconcernishowpeopleperceiveriskandhowitdifferstotheactualoutcome.Nevertheless,thepsychologicalresearchonriskprovidesfundamentalknowledgeofhowemotionsarelinkedtodecisionmaking.RiskinSociologyInsociologyriskisasociallyconstructedphenomenon(i.e.,asocialproblem)anddefinedasastrategyreferringtoinstrumentalrationality.Thesociologicalliteratureonriskwasoriginatedfromanthropologyandpsychologyisdominatedbytwocentralconcepts.First,riskandcultureandsecond,risksociety.Thenegativeconsequencesofunwantedevents(i.e.,natural/chemicaldisasters,foodsafety)arethekeyfocusofsociologicalresearchesonrisk.Fromasociologicalperspectiveentrepreneursremainliablefortheriskofthesocietyandresponsibletoshareitinproportiontotheirrespectivecontributions.Practically,theresponsibilitiesareimposedandactionsaremonitoredbystateregulatorsandsupervisors.Nevertheless,identificationofasociallyacceptablethresholdofriskisakeychallengeofmanysociologicalresearchesonrisk.ConvergenceofMultidisciplinaryViewsofRiskDifferentdisciplinaryviewsofriskareobvious.Whereas,economicsandfinancestudyriskbyexaminingthedistributionofcorporatereturns,psychologyandsociologyinterpretriskintermsofitsbehavioralcomponents.Moreover,economistsfocusontheeconomic(i.e.,commercial)valueofinvestmentsinariskysituation.Incontrast,sociologistsargueonthemoralvalue(i.e.,sacrifice)ontheriskrelatedactivitiesofthefirm.Inaddition,sociologists’criticismofeconomists’concernofriskisthatalthoughtheyrelyonrisk,time,andpreferenceswhiledescribingtheissuesrelatedtorisktaking,theyoftenmissouttheirinterrelationships(i.e.,narrowperspective).Interestingly,thereappearssomeconvergenceofeconomicsandpsychologyintheliteratureofeconomicpsychology.Theintentionistoincludethetraditionaleconomicmodelofindividuals’formalrationalactionintheunderstandingofthewaytheyactuallythinkandbehave(i.e.,irrationality).Inaddition,behavioralfinanceisseenasagrowingdisciplinewiththeoriginofeconomicsandpsychology.Incontrasttoefficientmarkethypothesisbehaviourfinanceprovidesdescriptivemodelsinmakingjudgmentunderuncertainty.TheoriginofthisconvergencewasduetothediscoveryoftheprospecttheoryinthefulfillmentoftheshortcomingsofvonNeumann-Morgenstern’sutilitytheoryforprovidingreasonsofhuman(irrational)behaviorunderuncertainty(e.g.,arbitrage).Although,theoverridingenquiryofdisciplinesistheestimationofrisk,theycomparingandreducingintoacommonmetricofmanytypesofrisksarethereultimatedifficulty.Thekeyconclusionoftheaboveanalysissuggeststhatthereexistoverlapsonthedisciplinaryviewsofriskandtheirinterrelationsareemergingwiththeprogressofriskresearch.Inparticular,thecentralideaofERMistoobscurethehiddendependenciesofriskbeyonddisciplinarysilos.InsuranceIndustryPracticeThepracticeofERMintheinsuranceindustryhasbeendrawnfromtheauthor’sPhDresearchcompletedin2006.TheinitiativesoffourmajorglobalEuropeaninsurers(hereinafterreferredas“CASES”)werestudiedforthispurpose.Outofthesefourinsurersoneisareinsurerandtheremainingthreeareprimaryinsurers.TheywereatvariousstagesofdesigningandimplementingERM.Atotaloffifty-oneface-to-faceandtelephoneinterviewswereconductedwithkeypersonneloftheCASESinbetweentheendof2004andthebeginningof2006.Thecomparativeanalysis(compare-and-contrast)techniquewasusedtoanalyzethedataandtheywerediscussedwithseveralindustryandacademicexpertsforthepurposeofvalidation.Thereafter,aconceptualmodelofERMwasdevelopedfromthefindingsofthedata.Findingsbasedonthedataarearrangedunderfivedimensions.Theyareunderstanding;evaluation;structure;challenges,andperformanceofERM.UnderstandingofERMItwasfoundthatthekeydistinctioninvariousperceptionsofERMremainsbetweenriskmeasurementandriskmanagement.Interestingly,toolsandprocessesarefoundcomplimentary.Inessence,meaningthatatoolcannotrunwithoutaprocessandviceversa.Itisfoundthatthepeoplewhoworkwithnumbers(e.g.,actuaries,financepeople,etc.)areinvolvedintheriskmodelingandmanagement(mostlyconcernedwiththefinancialandcoreinsurancerisks)andtendtobelieveERMisatool.Ontheotherhandinternalauditors,companysecretaries,andoperationalmanagers;whosejobisrelatedtothehuman,systemandcompliancerelatedissuesofriskaremorelikelytoseeERMasaprocess.ERM:AProcessWithintheunderstandingofERMasaprocess,fourkeyconceptswerefound.Theyareharmonization,standardization,integrationandcentralization.Infact,theyarelinkedtotheconceptoftop-downandbottom-upapproachesofERM.TheanalysisfoundfourkeyconceptsofERM.Theyareharmonization,standardization,integrationandcentralization(indecreasingorderofimportance).ItwasalsofoundthatauniqueunderstandingofERMdoesnotexistwithintheCASES,ratherERMisseenasacombinationofthefourconceptsandtheyoftenoverlap.ItisrevealedthatanunderstandingofthesefourconceptsincludingtheirlinkagesisessentialfordesigninganoptimalERMsystem.LinkagesAmongsttheFourConceptsAlthoughharmonizationandstandardizationareseenapparentlysimilarrespondentsviewthemdifferently.Whereas,harmonizationallowschoicesbetweenalternatives,standardizationprovidesnoflexibility.Effectively,harmonizationoffersarangeofidenticalalternatives,outofwhichoneormorecanbeadopteddependingonthegivencircumstances.Althoughstandardizationdoesnotoffersuchflexibility,itwasfoundasanessentialtechniqueofERM.Whilstharmonizationacceptsexistingdivergencetobringastateofcomparability,standardizationdoesnotnecessarilyconsiderexistingconventionsanddefinitions.Itfocusesonacommonstandard,(a“top-down”approach).Indeed,integrationofcompetentpoliciesandprocesses,models,anddata(eitherformanagementuse,complianceandreporting)arenotpossibleforglobalinsurerswithoutharmonizingandstandardizingthem.Hence,theresearchestablishesthatasequence(i.e.,harmonization,standardization,integration,andthencentralization)istobemaintainedwhenERMisbeingdevelopedinpractice(fromanoperationalperspective).Aboveall,theprocessisfoundimportanttoachieveadiversifiedriskcultureacrosstheorganizationtoallocateriskmanagementresponsibilitiestoriskownersandrisktakers.ERM:AToolViewedasatool,ERMencompassesproceduresandtechniquestomodelandmeasuretheportfolioof(quantifiable)enterpriseriskfrominsurers’coredisciplinaryperspective.Theobjectiveistomeasurealevelof(riskadjusted)capital(i.e.,economiccapital)andthereafterallocationofcapital.InthisperspectiveERMisthoughtasasophisticatedversionofinsurers’asset-liabilitymanagement.Mostoften,extremeandemergingrisks,whichmaybringtheorganizationdown,aretakenintoconsideration.Ideally,theprocedureofcalculatingeconomiccapitaliscloselylinkedtothemarketvolatility.Moreover,theobjectiveisclear,i.e.,meetingtheexpectationofshareholders.Consequently,thereremainslessscopetocapturethesubjectivityassociatedwithenterpriserisks.ERM:AnApproachIncontrasttoprocessandtool,ERMisalsofoundasanapproachofmanagingtheentirebusinessfromastrategicpointofview.Since,riskissodeeplyrootedintheinsurancebusiness,itisdifficulttoseparateriskfromthefunctionsofinsurancecompanies.ItisarguedthataproperlydesignedERMinfrastructureshouldalignrisktoachievestrategicgoals.Alternatively,applicationofanERMapproachofmanagingbusinessisfoundcentraltothevaluecreationofinsurancecompanies.Inthestudy,ERMisbelievedasanapproachofchangingthecultureoftheorganizationinbothmarketingandstrategicmanagementissuesintermsofinnovatingandpricingproducts,selectingprofitablemarkets,distributingproducts,targetingcustomersandratings,andthusformulatingappropriatecorporatestrategies.Inthisholisticapproachvariousstrategic,financialandoperationalconcernsareseenintegratedtoconsiderallrisksacrosstheorganization.Itisseenthatasaprocess,ERMtakesaninductiveapproachtoexplorethepitfalls(challenges)ofachievingcorporateobjectivesforbroaderaudience(i.e.,stakeholders)emphasizingmoreonmoralandethicalissues.Incontrast,asatool,ittakesadeductiveapproachtomeetspecificcorporateobjectivesforselectedaudience(i.e.,shareholders)byconcentratingmoreonmonitory(financial)outcomes.Clearly,theapproachesarecomplimentaryandhaveoverlappingelements.外文題目：AnEmpiricalStudyonEnterpriseRiskManagementinInsurance出處：NewFrontiersinEnterpriseRiskManagement作者：MAcharyya譯文：保險(xiǎn)業(yè)對(duì)企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理的實(shí)證研究企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理涉及各種行業(yè)(如保險(xiǎn)精算師、公司財(cái)政經(jīng)理、保險(xiǎn)商、會(huì)計(jì)和內(nèi)部審計(jì)員)，當(dāng)前企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理解決方案往往不能涵蓋所有的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，因?yàn)檫@些方案取決于決策者和執(zhí)行則的專(zhuān)業(yè)道德和原則。在一家典型的保險(xiǎn)公司中，專(zhuān)業(yè)工作將以小組的形式完成，風(fēng)險(xiǎn)也可以稱(chēng)為因素，其阻礙組織目標(biāo)的實(shí)現(xiàn)進(jìn)而影響整體。而孤立的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理往往忽略了全局。本文所研究的全面的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理是合理的，也是一般管理活動(dòng)的最終目標(biāo)。風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理不是一個(gè)獨(dú)立的業(yè)務(wù)流程的，管理目標(biāo)的關(guān)鍵應(yīng)該是處理好風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的負(fù)面效應(yīng)，以及從風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的正面效應(yīng)中獲取機(jī)會(huì)。企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理是風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理的一種途徑，它是各個(gè)學(xué)科的專(zhuān)家達(dá)成的共識(shí)。企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理要具有前攝性，應(yīng)立足于企業(yè)的未來(lái)發(fā)展。企業(yè)應(yīng)了解風(fēng)險(xiǎn)涉及的范圍以及可能引起的損失。有效的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理是以全面的框架為基礎(chǔ)的一項(xiàng)跨學(xué)科的實(shí)踐活動(dòng)。無(wú)論以何種名義定義這種新型的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理（本文指的是不同的名稱(chēng)，如企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理，戰(zhàn)略風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理，整體風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理），最終都統(tǒng)一于對(duì)該企業(yè)所有重大風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的管理。風(fēng)險(xiǎn)存在于任何事項(xiàng)中，企業(yè)的任何一項(xiàng)決策，無(wú)論是虧損還是獲利都與風(fēng)險(xiǎn)密切相關(guān)。企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理理論上是簡(jiǎn)單合理的，但由于它的主體是社會(huì)，有廣泛的利益相關(guān)者，而且涉及到不同信仰，不同世界觀的社會(huì)群體，在現(xiàn)實(shí)中很難實(shí)行。企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理需要理論作為依據(jù)，但卻始終缺少?gòu)?qiáng)有力的理論（它涉及跨學(xué)科的概念）。本文認(rèn)為，現(xiàn)在需要的是一個(gè)整體框架的發(fā)展，本文的主要任務(wù)就是建立一個(gè)完整的理論體系，以促進(jìn)企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理的實(shí)際運(yùn)用。多學(xué)科的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)觀：此次討論的目的是研究保險(xiǎn)公司的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理。為此我們?cè)O(shè)計(jì)了一份調(diào)查，調(diào)查內(nèi)容是保險(xiǎn)業(yè)實(shí)際面臨的狀況，調(diào)查目的是盡量減少學(xué)者和從業(yè)人員之間的差距，以促進(jìn)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理的實(shí)證研究。近年來(lái)，風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理已成為金融界一個(gè)重點(diǎn)討論的話(huà)題，尤其是銀行業(yè)和保險(xiǎn)業(yè)。專(zhuān)業(yè)組織發(fā)表關(guān)于企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理的研究報(bào)告，咨詢(xún)公司為支持他們的客戶(hù)進(jìn)行廣泛的研究課題和調(diào)查，評(píng)級(jí)機(jī)構(gòu)在評(píng)級(jí)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中包含了企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理。監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)更注重金融機(jī)構(gòu)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理能力。學(xué)者們也逐漸響應(yīng)從業(yè)人員的號(hào)召，提倡對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理構(gòu)建一個(gè)全面的框架結(jié)構(gòu)，其中心思想是使該組織貼近市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)。然而大家推崇各自核心專(zhuān)業(yè)的企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理思想。風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理的重點(diǎn)是整個(gè)管理活動(dòng)中任何性質(zhì)的一切風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。在一些學(xué)科中，仍有大量風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理知識(shí)是孤立存在的（例如，經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)，金融學(xué)，心理學(xué)，社會(huì)學(xué)等），完整的跨學(xué)科風(fēng)險(xiǎn)體系還未建立。此外，整體（即多學(xué)科的）風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性質(zhì)的理論認(rèn)識(shí)仍是盲點(diǎn)，因此，人們對(duì)跨學(xué)科的企業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理的認(rèn)識(shí)仍然難以達(dá)成共識(shí)。金融學(xué)中的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)：在金融學(xué)中，風(fēng)險(xiǎn)主要通過(guò)期望值和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)程度來(lái)表現(xiàn)。傳統(tǒng)規(guī)避風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的方法是投資組合理論；金融風(fēng)險(xiǎn)包括系統(tǒng)性風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和非系統(tǒng)性風(fēng)險(xiǎn)；系統(tǒng)性風(fēng)險(xiǎn)與投資回報(bào)率密切相關(guān)，但與企業(yè)自身盈利能力無(wú)關(guān)；金融風(fēng)險(xiǎn)還包括違約風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，這與公司的業(yè)績(jī)密切相關(guān)；相當(dāng)一部分金融風(fēng)險(xiǎn)與投資組合風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的衡量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)有關(guān)（如標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差，β，風(fēng)險(xiǎn)等）；除了投資組合理論，資本資產(chǎn)定價(jià)模型在完美的資本市場(chǎng)也適用于風(fēng)險(xiǎn)資產(chǎn)的定價(jià)；衍生市場(chǎng)隨著期權(quán)定價(jià)理論的推廣而迅速擴(kuò)張。經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)中的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)：經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)中的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)可以分為兩類(lèi)即內(nèi)部風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和外部風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。經(jīng)濟(jì)決策往往是在存在多個(gè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的不確定性下做出的。預(yù)期效用理論認(rèn)為，人們根據(jù)自己的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)態(tài)度判斷風(fēng)險(xiǎn)大?。ㄐ⌒停行?，大型），而根據(jù)財(cái)富效用理論，風(fēng)險(xiǎn)態(tài)度取決于財(cái)富，它通過(guò)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的概率來(lái)衡量。經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家認(rèn)為當(dāng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)很大時(shí)，人們是風(fēng)險(xiǎn)厭惡型的。風(fēng)險(xiǎn)預(yù)期理論論述了風(fēng)險(xiǎn)狀態(tài)下的選擇分析。標(biāo)準(zhǔn)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)厭惡是指在獨(dú)立的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)中偏好于承擔(dān)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的個(gè)體。經(jīng)濟(jì)中對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的研究來(lái)自于為彩票和其他賭博行為制定規(guī)則。心理學(xué)中的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)：雖然經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)假定個(gè)人的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)偏好是信念的表現(xiàn)，心理學(xué)家仍在研究系統(tǒng)的判斷和行為