Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorGordon M. Kaufman.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMattar, Mahdi H. (Mahdi Haidar), 1975-en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2005-10-14T19:33:04Z
dc.date.available2005-10-14T19:33:04Z
dc.date.copyright2002en_US
dc.date.issued2002en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/29268
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2002.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (leaves 71-79).en_US
dc.description.abstractIn the first essay of this thesis, we extend the traditional decision analysis theory of buying price and selling price of a lottery. We allow the decision maker to rebalance his financial portfolio in the course of determination of a lottery's buying (selling) price. We build on the classical portfolio allocation problem in complete markets, generalizing to include both traded and non-traded unique risks. Our principal focus is on private risks-risks that are not tradable in financial markets. The first essay: Generalizes the treatment of the buying price and the selling price of a private risk lottery by allowing portfolio rebalancing in the course of determining these prices and Outlines the implications of this generalization for distributive bargaining. The second essay is a study of methods for pricing unique risks in real options problems. This essay is a critical evaluation of how methods currently in vogue for pricing private risks affect real option value. We build a framework for valuing investments under uncertainty in the presence of private risks and demonstrate by example that different methods for pricing private risk can lead to decisively different real option values. To this end we use the classical oil and gas exploration and development example pioneered by Paddock, Siegel and Smith(1978). We show how, when private risks are present in this setting, alternative methods for valuation can lead to large differences in choice of a development policy and in associated valuations.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Mahdi H. Mattar.en_US
dc.format.extent79 leavesen_US
dc.format.extent2728667 bytes
dc.format.extent2728476 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582
dc.subjectCivil and Environmental Engineering.en_US
dc.titlePrivate risken_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreePh.D.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
dc.identifier.oclc51954622en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record