Cited by 89Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisIncome, Poverty, and InequalityEconomic theories and models

Optimal Financial Knowledge and Wealth Inequality

Open access
Lusardi, Annamaria, Michaud, Pierre-Carl, Mitchell, Olivia·2013·National Bureau of Economic Research

Abstract

While financial knowledge is strongly positively related to household wealth, there is also considerable cross-sectional variation in both financial knowledge and net asset levels.To explore these patterns, we develop a calibrated stochastic life cycle model featuring endogenous financial knowledge accumulation.The model generates substantial wealth inequality, over and above that of standard life cycle models; this is because higher earners typically have more hump-shaped labor income profiles and lower retirement benefits which, when interacted with precautionary saving motives, boost their need for private wealth accumulation and thus financial knowledge.Our simulations show that endogenous financial knowledge accumulation has the potential to account for a large proportion of wealth inequality.The fraction of the population which is rationally financially "ignorant" depends on the generosity of the retirement system and the level of means-tested benefits.Educational efforts to enhance financial savvy early in the life cycle so as to produce one percentage point excess return per year would be valued highly by people in all educational groups.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3386/w18669

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Due to heterogeneity, not everyone should change their behavior after receiving standardized financial training.

    “Lusardi and Mitchell (2013) show in a theoretical model that due to this heterogeneity, not everyone should change its behavior after receiving standardized financial training.”

    From Financial literacy, financial advice, and financial behavior (2017) · cites this paper as Lusardi and Mitchell (2013)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Becker, G. S. 1975. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, 2nd Ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
  2. Behrman, J., O. S. Mitchell, C. Soo, and D. Bravo. 2012. "Financial Knowledge, Schooling, and Wealth Accumulation." American Economic Review. 102(3): 300-304.
  3. Browning, M., L. Hansen, and J. Heckman. 1999. "Micro Data and General Equilibrium Models." In Handbook of Macroeconomics. J.B. Taylor and M. Woodford, Eds. Amsterdan: Elsevier Science B.V.: 543-633 .
  4. Dynan, K., J. Skinner and S. Zeldes. 2004. "Do the Rich Save More?" Journal of Political Economy. 112 (2): 397-444.
  5. Hastings, J., O. S. Mitchell, and E. Chyn. 2011. "Fees, Framing, and Financial Literacy in the Choice of Pension Managers." In Financial Literacy: Implica- tions for Retirement Security and the Financial Marketplace. O. S. Mitchell and A. Lusardi, eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 101-115.
  6. Hubbard, R. G., J. Skinner, and S. Zeldes. 1995. "Precautionary Savings and Social Insurance." Journal of Political Economy. 103(2): 360-399.
  7. Lusardi, A., and O. S. Mitchell. 2007. "Baby Boomer Retirement Security: The Roles of Planning, Financial Knowledge, and Housing Wealth." Journal of Monetary Economics. 54: 207-224.
  8. S. Ogura, T. Tachibanaki, and D.A. Wise, eds. Chicago, IL: Univ. of Chicago Press: 25-64.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lusardi, A., Michaud, P.-C., & Mitchell, O.
Affiliations
National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
Venue
National Bureau of Economic Research
Published
2013-01
OpenAlex
W2890399122
Cited by
89
References
50
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 1
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • RAND Corporation
  • U.S. Social Security Administration
  • University of Pennsylvania
  • Network for Studies on Pensions, Aging and Retirement
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic theories and models
Keywords
financial knowledge, wealth inequality, precautionary saving, retirement benefits, means-tested benefits, financial education, household wealth

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review