I would like to just confirm and bring small thing into your notice. In my paper, I am giving a reference as Born and Pfeifer (2014b) used the term EMAS as ergodic mean in the absence of shocks.
In your Risk Matters: A Comment (Dynare version). In footnote 2 you mentioned “We use the term EMAS for FGRU’s concept of [s]tarting from the ergodic mean and in the absence of shocks” (p. 10 in their technical appendix) ……………. Therefore, you coined the term EMAS. I just notice working paper https://site.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj8706/f/4880-bretscherhsutamoni_riskaversionv6.pdf
They also mentioned in section F-1 that " We use the term EMAS for Ferna´ndez-Villaverde et al. (2011)’s concept of “[s]tarting from the ergodic mean and in the absence of shocks” (p. 10 in their technical appendix).
Please note that this is for my own understanding regarding citation and plagiarism. One, another reason is that I am also using your Risk matter’s paper.
I knew that they have said in section F, “We refer the interest reader to the Born and Pfeifer (2014)”. But I am still wonder whether we can pick up exact same sentence from another article as they do the follow sentences
“because it is the point of the state space where, in absence of shocks in that period, agents would choose to remain although they are taking future volatility into account”
In your footnote.(2)
because it is the point of the state space where, in absence of shocks in that period, agents would choose to remain although they are taking future volatility into account.