CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING Consumer Behavior. Philip A. Viton. March 4, Introduction 2


 Magdalen Charles
 2 years ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING 7230 Consumer Behavior Philip A. Viton March 4, 2015 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Foundations Consumption bundles Preference relations Rationality Utility functions Counterexample Utility maximization Setup Maximizing utility Marshallian demands Indirect utility function Properties of the indirect utility function Properties of the Marshallian demands Elasticities and their properties Comparative statics Expenditure Minimization Minimizing expenditure The Hicksian (compensated) demands The expenditure function Properties of the expenditure function Properties of the Hicksian demands
2 5 Comparative Statics of Utility Maximization The Slutsky equation Introduction In this note we study the behavior of an individual consumer. To economize on notation, we will not index the individual concerned: however, when two or more individuals are being discussed, almost everything here would need a subscript denoting which individual is in question. (We will need to do this later when we discuss general equilibrium and taxation theory). 2 Foundations 2.1 Consumption bundles We assume that our individual wishes to select quantities of n available goods to consume. If the quantity of good i is x i then a consumption bundle is just a vector of quantities of all goods: x = (x 1, x 2,..., x n ). The (feasible) consumption set X is assumed to be all bundles with nonnegative quantities (components), so for feasibility we require x R n +. Note that we allow for fractional (realvalued) consumption quantities. Notation: x is an nvector (consumption bundle): the quantity of the ith good in bundle x is x i. y is another bundle: the quantity of the ith good in bundle y is y i. When we need to refer to more than two bundles, we will sometimes use superscripts to identify them: x j is a third bundle of n goods: the quantity of good i in x j is x j i. 2.2 Preference relations We assume that our individual has preferences over different bundles, and that our task is to describe those preferences. (In other words, we do not attempt to say where these preferences come from: that is the job of psychology and/or sociology). It is important to note at the outset that we distinguish between prefer 2
3 ences and opportunities to satisfy those preferences: for example, we can think of a homeless person s preferring a bundle consisting of 1 Maserati and 2 Rolls Royce s to a bundle consisting of a ticket to the Space Station and a condominium on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan, though neither bundle is (or is likely to be) actually available to him or her. (This is implicit in our description of the consumption set as R n + ). In this section we are concerned with preferences, not opportunities. We will describe our individual s preferences in terms of a binary preference relation such that for two consumption bundles x and y the statement x y says that bundle x is at least as good as bundle y. 1,2 Using our basic preference relation we can define two more (derived) preference relations: Preferred to: we write x y and say that x is (strictly) preferred to y if x y and not(y x). Indifferent to: we write x y and say that x is indifferent to y if both x y and y x. The set of all bundles x that are indifferent to a given bundle y generates the yindifferencecurve for this individual. Here are some properties we may wish to attribute to our preference relations: Completeness of : for all x, y X : either x y or y x (or both). Completeness says that the relation is capable of dealing with all feasible bundles. Equivalently, any two bundles can always be compared using. Reflexivity of : for all x X : x x. Any bundle x is at least as good as itself. This should be uncontroversial. Transitivity of : for all x, y, z X : x y and y z implies x z. Transitivity is a bit more controversial, but is needed in order for there to be a best choice of a consumption bundle. 1 This applies to the individual we are describing: remember that different individuals will have different preference relations, and when we are comparing different individuals we would have to write j and k for individuals j and k. 2 In class we will probably use xry for x y because there is less possibility of confusing with when written on a blackboard. For the derived relations and we will probably use P and I. 3
4 To see why, suppose, intransitively, that x y and y z but z x. Suppose we start with bundle z. Then since y z we would prefer to switch to bundle y. But given x y, we would prefer to switch from y to x. But since z x we d prefer to switch from x to z, and we re back where we started, going in circles. With intransitive preferences there s no way we can settle on a mostpreferred bundle. Continuity of : for all y X, the sets {x : x y} and {x : x y} are closed. The two sets in question are the set of all bundles that are at least as good as a given bundle y, and those that are no better than y. Suppose we have a sequence of bundles x 1, x 2,... such that x 1 y, x 2 y,... etc. Suppose the sequence converges to a bundle x. Under continuity, x y. (Similarly for x y). Intuitively, this says that small changes in bundles do not lead to big changes in the way those bundles are evaluated. Strong monotonicity: if x y and x y then x y. In this, x y means that x i y i for all components i. Strong monotonicity is a way of saying more is better. Note that we may need to redefine the goods in order to make this plausible: for example, clearly, more air pollution is not better than less; but we can retain the monotonicity assumption if we redefine the good in question to be clean air. Local nonsatiation: for any x X and any vector ε > 0, there is some bundle y with x y < ε such that y x. This says that given any bundle x, we can always find a better one. It should be clear that strong monotonicity implies local nonsatiation, but not viceversa. Strict convexity: For all x, y, z X such that x y, if x y and y z then [αx + (1 α)y] z. Strict convexity says that our individual prefers averages to extremes. 2.3 Rationality The minimal assumptions needed for a useful preference relation are that is complete and transitive, and in that case we say that is rational. It can be shown that if is rational then for the derived relations and : 4
5 is irreflexive (not(x x), ie x is not preferred to itself) and transitive. is reflexive, transitive and symmetric (x y implies y x). 2.4 Utility functions We could do all our work solely in terms of the preference relation and its derived relations and. But this will be cumbersome. Can we find a better way? It would be nice to be able to summarize a bundle by a single (real) number, in such a way that comparisons between bundles come down to comparisons between numbers. It would also be nice if the summary measures were continuous in the bundle components, so that we could use the tools of calculus. Of course, for this to be useful, any summary function must be related to the individual s preferences. We shall therefore say that a (continuous) function u(x) = u(x 1, x 2,..., x n ), which is a function from R n to R 1, represents an individual s preferences if u(x) u(y) if and only if x y ; and u(x) > u(y) if and only if x y. Such a representing function is called a utility function. What it does is reduce the problem of comparing bundles via preference orderings to the potentially simpler problem of plugging in the bundles into the utility function and then just comparing single numbers. But can we find a utility function that represents an individual s preferences? (This is the existence question). The following fundamental result is due to Gerard Debreu, but will not be proved here: Theorem: suppose preferences are complete, transitive (ie, rational), reflexive, and strongly monotonic. Then there exists a utility function that represents those preferences. If in addition preferences are continuous, then the utility function is, too. (Note that the hypotheses here do not involve convexity). It is worth noting that this representation is not unique. If u represents someone s preferences, and if g is a positive monotonic transformation, then g(u(x)) also represents the same preferences. So the actual values of the utility function have no special meaning. We say that utility is ordinal, not cardinal: all that matters is whether one value is greater than, less than, or equal to another value. At the 5
6 level of a specific individual this causes no difficulties, but if we want to compare different individuals, we need to remember that the utility numbers (values) are in a certain sense arbitrary. 3 By way of a weaker result we prove: Theorem: The relation can be represented by a realvalued utility function u only if it is rational. Proof: Suppose u represents. Then we have to show that is rational, ie complete and transitive. Completeness: since u is realvalued, then for any x and y we have either u(x) u(y) or u(y) u(x). (This is just the order property of the real numbers). But since u represents, the first case says x y and the second says y x. So is complete. Transitivity: Suppose x y and y z. We have to show that x z. But since u represents, x y implies u(x) u(y), and y z implies u(y) u(z). By the transitivity of, u(x) u(z), and since u represents, we have x z. Thus is transitive. 2.5 Counterexample It is important to realize that not all preferences can be represented by a continuous utility function. The standard counterexample is given by the idea of lexicographic preferences. Suppose that we are in a twogood world, so that bundles are 2vectors. And suppose that preferences are as follows: if x 1 > y 1 then x y if x 1 = y 1 then x y if x 2 > y 2 What s going on here is that we first rank bundles based only on their quantities of the first good. Only if the quantities of the first good are the same do we look at the quantity of the second good. The name lexicographic comes from the analogy of the order of words in a dictionary: words beginning with a come before those beginning with b, and if two words both begin with a then we order then by their next letter (aa comes before bc and aa comes before ab), etc. 3 This leads to the vexed problem of interpersonal comparisons of utility, and is one motivation for basing such comparisons on willingnesstopay. 6
7 Lexicographic preferences are inconsistent with continuity. To see this, take y = (2, 1) and consider a sequence of bundles x i, (i = 1, 2,... ) where x i = (2 1, 0). (The first few bundles in the sequence are (2.1, 0), (2.01, 0), (2.001, 0)). 10 i Clearly under lexicographic preferences we have x 1 y, x 2 y, and in fact for any i we have x i y. But the sequence of bundles x i converges to x = (2, 0), and if we compare x and y then with lexicographic preferences we have y x. This violates the characterization of continuity given above on p Utility maximization 3.1 Setup We focus on an individual in an ngood world whose preferences are rational, reflexive continuous and strongly monotonic, and therefore can be represented by a continuous utility function u(x) = u(x 1, x 2,..., x n ). We assume that the individual has available income M to spend on the goods in question, and write p i for the market price of good i. The individual is assumed to be a pricetaker in the usual sense that he/she regards the p i as fixed (parametric). The set of affordable bundles is the set of x s such that p x = i p i x i M. We shall write, as usual, px for p x. The individual s problem is to choose a best (mostpreferred) consumption bundle. Since we assume that preferences are strongly monotonic, hence locally nonsatiated, we know that any bundle that does not exhaust available income can be improved upon: thus we know that a best bundle must satisfy the individual s budget constraint: px = p 1 x 1 + p 2 x p n x n = M (note the equality). We could make this a bit more intuitively plausible by defining one of the goods to be, eg, savings, so that it is not necessary to spend all one s income on current consumption. It is also possible to extend the approach in a natural way to an intertemporal choice setting, where the problem for the individual is to select quantities of goods indexed by the time at which they will be consumed; but we do not do that here. (The interesting part of intertemporal choice is the issue of whether timedenominated prices exist). 7
8 3.2 Maximizing utility The problem of the consumer is to choose x = (x 1, x 2,..., x n ) to: max u(x) s.t. px = M This is a 1equalityconstraint maximization problem. The Lagrangian is: L = u(x) + λ(m px) leading to the FOCs: L u = 0 : λp i = 0, x i x i L = 0 : M px = 0 x i i The quantity u/ x i u i is the marginal utility of good i. We can also express the FOCs in the x s as: u i = p i u j p j On the left we have the slope of an indifference curve, called the marginal rate of substitution; and on the right we have the slope of the budget constraint. In equilibrium, a level curve of the utility function must be tangent to the budget constraint. The SOC involves the bordered Hessian: u 11 u u 1n p 1 u 21 u u 2n p 2 H =... u n1 u n2... u nn p n p 1 p 2... p n 0 and since this is a 1equlityconstraint maximization problem we must have the (leading) borderpreserving principal minors of the Hessian alternating in sign, beginning with the order2 minor, which is the determinant of a 3 3 matrix whose sign is ( 1) 2 ie positive: H 2 = u 11 u 11 p 1 u 21 u 22 p 2 p 1 p > 0
9 Note that if we assume that the problem generates a unique interior solution, we are in effect assuming that the underlying utility function is convex. 3.3 Marshallian demands Assuming that the conditions of the Implicit Function Theorem hold, we can solve the FOCs for the optimal choices of the x s: these will depend on the problem parameters, and we write them as: x (p, M) = (x1 (p, M), x 2 (p, M),..., x n (p, M)) These are the Marshallian (or ordinary) demand functions. They tell us the best quantity of x i to consume when faced with parametric prices p and with available income M. We also obtain the optimal value of the Lagrange multiplier: λ (p, M). 3.4 Indirect utility function The indirect objective function is obtained by evaluating the (direct) objective function at the optimal choices. The result in this case is the indirect utility function, usually written as V (p, M), and we have V (p, M) u(x (p, M)) The indirect utility function tells us the greatest value of the utility index that we can obtain, given prices p and income M. 3.5 Properties of the indirect utility function We have two important and useful results: Shephard s Lemma: We have V (p, M) = λ (p, M) xi (p, M) V (p, M) M = λ (p, M) 9
10 Proof: Envelope Theorem. The second result gives us an interpretation of the Lagrange multiplier: it is the marginal utility of income. Intuitively, it converts income to utility values, so that in the maximization process we re not trying to maximize apples (the utility function) subject to oranges (the budget constraint). Roy s Identity: V (p, M)/ V (p, M)/ M = x i (p, M) Proof: Follows from Shephard s Lemma by direct calculation. Other properties (without proofs) are: V (p, M) is homogeneous of degree 0 in (p, M). V ( p, M) is nondecreasing in M and nonincreasing in p. V ( p, M) is quasiconvex When u(x) is continuous, V (p, M) is continuous too. (The proofs of the first two largely parallel the corresponding properties of the profit function). 3.6 Properties of the Marshallian demands We can also see that the Marshallian demands are homogeneous of degree zero in prices and income: xi (α p, αm) = x i (p, M). This is because scaling up all prices and income by the same proportion doesn t change the budget constraint (in the 2good case, the intercepts of the budget constraint are x i = M/p i and this will be unchanged at αm/α p i ) and hence won t change the solution, since the utility function doesn t depend on prices and income. 10
11 3.7 Elasticities and their properties We define the price jelasticity of demand for good i as η i j = x i p j p j x i Intuitively, this is the percentage change in the demand for good i, per percentage change in the price of good j. The case j = i gives rise to the ownprice elasticity of demand; otherwise we have a crosselasticity. Similarly, we define the income elasticity of demand for good i as ηi M = x i M M xi (Intuitively: the percentage change in the demand for good i, per percent change in income). The advantage of elasticities over slopes (derivatives) is that they are dimensionless quantities, whereas if we are told that the ownprice slope of demand is, say, 2, we need to know the units in which both demand and price are measured in order to make sense of it. First, since the Marshallian demands are homogeneous of degree zero in prices and income, Euler s (addingup) Theorem implies: j x i p j p j + x i M M = 0 Now divide through by x i and obtain: j x i p j p j x i + x i M M xi = 0 Thus we see that the elasticities satisfy: ηi j + η i M = 0 i Next, recall that the Marshallian demands satisfy the FOCs as identities. This means (for the FOC corresponding to the Lagrange multiplier) that p x (p, M) M 11
12 Now differentiate both sides with respect to M : i x i M p i = 1 and multiply and divide by terms which cancel out: x ( ) i M M p x i i = 1 x i i M xi M ( pi x ) i = 1 M x i i M ηi M κ i = 1 i that is, if we define a weight κ i as good i s share in total expenditures, then the weighted sum of the income elasticities of demand equals 1. Similarly, differentiating with respect to p i : and multiplying and dividing: j xi + j j j x j p i = 0 x j p i = x i x j p i p j x j p j = p i xi Mx j M x j p i p j x j x j M = p i xi M η ji κ j = κ i j 3.8 Comparative statics There are no straightforward comparative statics results for the uilitymaximization problem. To see this, focus on the 2good setting. Then the basic comparative 12
13 statics equation in p 1 is H x 1 /p 1 x 2 /p 1 λ /p 1 = λ 0 x 1 ie: u 11 u 11 p 1 u 21 u 22 p 2 p 1 p 2 0 x 1 /p 1 x 2 /p 1 λ /p 1 = so if we solve for the ownprice slope of the Marshallian demand we get (using Cramer s Rule): λ u 11 p 1 0 u 22 p 2 x1 x1 p 2 0 = p 1 H The numerator isn t a borderpreserving principal minor, and trying our next trick, doing the actual computation, yields λ 0 x 1 λ p 2 2 u 11x 1 p 2 + p 1 u 22 x 1 which is hardly helpful. As it turns out, there is a useful result here, but in order to develop it, we first need to consider a second problem facing our individual. 4 Expenditure Minimization 4.1 Minimizing expenditure We consider the problem of minimizing the cost (expenditure) necessary to realize a specific level of utility, which we will write as ū. Expenditure on a consumption bundle is px, so the problem is to choose x to: min s.t. px u(x) = ū The Lagrangian is: L = px + µ(ū u(x)) 13
14 leading to the FOCs: L x i = 0 : p i µu i = 0, i L µ = 0 : ū u(x) = 0 Note that, like the FOCs for the utility maximization problem, these also have the interpretation: at an optimum, the marginal rate of substitution (along the ū isoquant) equals the price ratio. 4.2 The Hicksian (compensated) demands Assuming that the Implicit Function Theorem applies, we can solve the FOCs obtain the optimal choice functions: x i (p, ū) the socalled Hicksian, or compensated demands. These tell us the leastcost quantities of the x s needed to attain the utility index ū. As the notation makes clear, they are different from the Marshallian demands which solve the utility maximization problem. It is also important to note that the Hicksian demands depend on the fixed utility index (ū) : they are therefore unobservable with data, unlike the Marshallian demands, which depend on observables, namely prices and income. We also get the optimal value of the Lagrange multiplier: µ (p, ū). The SOC involves the borderpreserving principal minors of the bordered Hessian: µ u 11 µ u µ u 1n u 1 µ u 21 µ u µ u 2n u 2 H =... µ u n1 µ u n2... µ u nn u n u 1 u 2... u n 0 (evaluated at a stationary point, so µ u 11 etc). 14
15 4.3 The expenditure function The indirect objective function for the expenditureminimization problem is the Expenditure Function: E(p, ū) = px (p, ū) which tells us the minimum outlay (expenditure) you need at prices p in order to attain the utility level (index) ū. 4.4 Properties of the expenditure function The expenditureminimization problem studied here is exactly analogous to the firm s cost minimization problem, so the properties, and their proofs, are the same, too. Shephard s Lemma: The expenditure function satisfies: E(p, ū) = xi (p, ū) E(p, ū) = µ (p, ū) ū we say that the Lagrange multiplier µ is the marginal cost of utility. E(p, ū) is homogeneous of degree 1 in p : E(α p, ū) = αe(p, ū) E(p, ū) is nondecreasing in p. E(p, ū) is concave in p. If u(x) is continuous, then E(p, ū) is continuous. 4.5 Properties of the Hicksian demands The Hicksian demands are the analogues of the costminimizing factor demands, hence we have a determinate comparativestatics result: x i (p, ū) < 0 15
16 Next, since the Hicksian demands are the derivatives of the expenditure function, they are homogeneous of degree 0 in p : xi (α p, ū) = xi (p, ū). If all prices scale up by α, the same demands result (though of course it takes α times as much expenditure to purchase them). We can also define compensated elasticities for the Hicksian demands and use Euler s addingup theorem to derive a set of elasticity relations, just as we did with the Marshallian demands. 5 Comparative Statics of Utility Maximization How do all these concepts fit together? First, consider the utilitymaximization problem: max u(x) s.t. px = M whose solution is x (p, M). Here we take the budget constraint (ie p and M) as given and find the highest possible attainable indifference curve, which is V ( p, M). Now take this indifference curve as given, and try to minimize the cost of getting onto it at the same prices p. A bit of thought, plus an examination of the pictures below, should convince you that the solution to the second problem has the same consumption bundle as the first, and moreover, the minimum expenditure you will need is exactly E(p, V (p, M). x.2 x.2 data: px = M x * 2(p,M) V(p,M) x ** 2(p,V(p,M)) data: V(p,M) E(p,V(p,M)) = px ** x * 1(p,M) x.1 x ** 1(p,V(p,M)) x.1 16
17 It works the other way, too. Suppose you solve the expenditureminimization problem: min s.t. px u(x) = ū whose solution is x (p, ū). Here we take the indifference curve labelled ū as given and minimize the cost of attaining it at prices p. That minimum cost is E(p, ū). Now give our individual income E(p, ū) so that the budget constraint is px = E(p, ū), and find the highest indifference curve you can reach. A bit of thought, together with the picture below, should convince you that the utilitymax problem will have the same quantities of the x s as the expendituremin problem, and moreover the label of the highest indifference curve will be V (p, M). x.2 x.2 data: px = E(p,u) x ** 2(p,u) data: u E(p,u) x * 2(p,M) V(p,M) x ** 1(p,u) x.1 x * 1(p,M) x.1 These observations lead to four useful identities: 1. E(p, V (p, M)) = M, p, M 2. V (p, E(p, ū)) = ū, p, ū 3. x i (p, E(p, ū)) = x i (p, ū), p, ū 4. xi (p, V (p, M)) = xi (p, M), p, M 17
18 5.1 The Slutsky equation Now we can finally derive our comparative statics result. Let x maximize utility at (p, M) and write ū = v(p, M). Now look at the third identity in the previous section, which we write as: xi (p, ū) = xi (p, E(p, ū)) Since it is an identity in p and ū, we can differentiate it on both sides with respect to p j. The result is: xi = x i + x i E p j p j M p j But we know that E(p, ū)/ p j = x j (p, ū) = x j (p, V (p, M)) = x j (p, M). The first equality is Shephard s Lemma for expenditure functions, the second is the definition of ū, and the third is identity (4) in the previous section. So we have: x i p j = x i p j + x i M x j the Slutsky Equation. An important special case is when i = j. The Slutsky Equation says: x i = x i + x i M x i and because the Hicksian demand slope downwards in ownprice, we conclude that: xi + x i M x i < 0 This is the major comparative statics result for the utilitymaximization problem. Note that this does not rule out the possibility that xi / > 0, the case of a Giffen (upwardsloping) demand function. But it does rule out something. Suppose we define an superior good (sometimes called normal in the literature) as one for which xi / M > 0. A superior good is one which, as your income goes up, you 18
19 consume more. 4,5 Then for a superior good whose consumption is nonzero, we can conclude that its demand function must slope downwards in ownprice (ie a superior good cannot be Giffen). By assumption, xi > 0 and xi / M > 0, so ( xi / M) xi > 0. But by the Slutsky equation the sum of ( xi / M) xi and xi / must be negative, hence xi / must also be negative. Even though (inferior) Giffen goods are possible, this doesn t mean that they actually occur. In empirical practice, a positive ownprice coefficient is usually taken to indicate that something has gone wrong. Finally, we can also derive a reciprocity relation. By Young s Theorem we know that: 2 E = 2 E p j p j so we get: ( ) E p j x j = = p j x i p j ( ) E (using Shephard s Lemma). Hence, the Slutsky Equation tells us that S ji = x j + x j M x i = x i p j + x i M x j = S i j the matrix S of Slutsky terms is symmetric. 4 The opposite case is that of an inferior good for which xi / M < 0 : as your income goes up, you tend to consume less of it. Possible examples for me at least are that a good French bordeaux wine is superior, while Gallo s cabernet wine is inferior. 5 Note that in this context superior and inferior arenot intended to express a moral judgement: they just refer to how demand reacts to income. Still, the terminology is probably a bit unfortunate. As far as I know, the terms superior and inferior date from the days of Alfred Marshall late nineteenth century when, at least at Cambridge, UK, economics was known as Moral Science and was thought of as a practical branch of ethics. 19
Lecture 2: Consumer Theory
Lecture 2: Consumer Theory Preferences and Utility Utility Maximization (the primal problem) Expenditure Minimization (the dual) First we explore how consumers preferences give rise to a utility fct which
More informationEconomics 401. Sample questions 1
Economics 40 Sample questions. Do each of the following choice structures satisfy WARP? (a) X = {a, b, c},b = {B, B 2, B 3 }, B = {a, b}, B 2 = {b, c}, B 3 = {c, a}, C (B ) = {a}, C (B 2 ) = {b}, C (B
More informationEnvelope Theorem. Kevin Wainwright. Mar 22, 2004
Envelope Theorem Kevin Wainwright Mar 22, 2004 1 Maximum Value Functions A maximum (or minimum) value function is an objective function where the choice variables have been assigned their optimal values.
More informationName. Final Exam, Economics 210A, December 2011 Here are some remarks to help you with answering the questions.
Name Final Exam, Economics 210A, December 2011 Here are some remarks to help you with answering the questions. Question 1. A firm has a production function F (x 1, x 2 ) = ( x 1 + x 2 ) 2. It is a price
More informationCost Minimization and the Cost Function
Cost Minimization and the Cost Function Juan Manuel Puerta October 5, 2009 So far we focused on profit maximization, we could look at a different problem, that is the cost minimization problem. This is
More informationProfit Maximization and the Profit Function
Profit Maximization and the Profit Function Juan Manuel Puerta September 30, 2009 Profits: Difference between the revenues a firm receives and the cost it incurs Cost should include all the relevant cost
More informationFirst Welfare Theorem
First Welfare Theorem Econ 2100 Fall 2015 Lecture 17, November 2 Outline 1 First Welfare Theorem 2 Preliminaries to Second Welfare Theorem Last Class Definitions A feasible allocation (x, y) is Pareto
More informationConsumer Theory: The Mathematical Core
Consumer Theory: The Mathematical Core Dan McFadden, C13 Suppose an individual has a utility function U(x) which is a function of nonnegative commodity vectors x = (x 1,x,...,x N ), and seeks to maximize
More informationPART II THEORY OF CONSUMER BEHAVIOR AND DEMAND
1 PART II THEORY OF CONSUMER BEHAVIOR AND DEMAND 2 CHAPTER 5 MARSHALL S ANALYSIS OF DEMAND Initially Alfred Marshall initially worked with objective demand curves. However by working backwards, he developed
More informationEconomics 2020a / HBS 4010 / HKS API111 FALL 2010 Solutions to Practice Problems for Lectures 1 to 4
Economics 00a / HBS 4010 / HKS API111 FALL 010 Solutions to Practice Problems for Lectures 1 to 4 1.1. Quantity Discounts and the Budget Constraint (a) The only distinction between the budget line with
More informationFollow links for Class Use and other Permissions. For more information send email to: permissions@pupress.princeton.edu
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Ariel Rubinstein: Lecture Notes in Microeconomic Theory is published by Princeton University Press and copyrighted, c 2006, by Princeton University Press. All rights reserved. No part
More informationLecture notes for Choice Under Uncertainty
Lecture notes for Choice Under Uncertainty 1. Introduction In this lecture we examine the theory of decisionmaking under uncertainty and its application to the demand for insurance. The undergraduate
More informationCONSUMER PREFERENCES THE THEORY OF THE CONSUMER
CONSUMER PREFERENCES The underlying foundation of demand, therefore, is a model of how consumers behave. The individual consumer has a set of preferences and values whose determination are outside the
More informationChoice under Uncertainty
Choice under Uncertainty Part 1: Expected Utility Function, Attitudes towards Risk, Demand for Insurance Slide 1 Choice under Uncertainty We ll analyze the underlying assumptions of expected utility theory
More informationInsurance. Michael Peters. December 27, 2013
Insurance Michael Peters December 27, 2013 1 Introduction In this chapter, we study a very simple model of insurance using the ideas and concepts developed in the chapter on risk aversion. You may recall
More informationG021 Microeconomics Lecture notes Ian Preston
G021 Microeconomics Lecture notes Ian Preston 1 Consumption set and budget set The consumption set X is the set of all conceivable consumption bundles q, usually identified with R n + The budget set B
More informationWalrasian Demand. u(x) where B(p, w) = {x R n + : p x w}.
Walrasian Demand Econ 2100 Fall 2015 Lecture 5, September 16 Outline 1 Walrasian Demand 2 Properties of Walrasian Demand 3 An Optimization Recipe 4 First and Second Order Conditions Definition Walrasian
More informationChapter 21: The Discounted Utility Model
Chapter 21: The Discounted Utility Model 21.1: Introduction This is an important chapter in that it introduces, and explores the implications of, an empirically relevant utility function representing intertemporal
More informationIncreasing for all. Convex for all. ( ) Increasing for all (remember that the log function is only defined for ). ( ) Concave for all.
1. Differentiation The first derivative of a function measures by how much changes in reaction to an infinitesimal shift in its argument. The largest the derivative (in absolute value), the faster is evolving.
More informationManagerial Economics Prof. Trupti Mishra S.J.M. School of Management Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay. Lecture  13 Consumer Behaviour (Contd )
(Refer Slide Time: 00:28) Managerial Economics Prof. Trupti Mishra S.J.M. School of Management Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay Lecture  13 Consumer Behaviour (Contd ) We will continue our discussion
More informationMoral Hazard. Itay Goldstein. Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Moral Hazard Itay Goldstein Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania 1 PrincipalAgent Problem Basic problem in corporate finance: separation of ownership and control: o The owners of the firm are typically
More informationMSc Economics Economic Theory and Applications I Microeconomics
MSc Economics Economic Theory and Applications I Microeconomics Dr Ken Hori, k.hori@bbk.ac.uk Birkbeck College, University of London October 2006 Contents 1 Theory of Choice: An Axiomatic Approach 1 1.1
More information1 Uncertainty and Preferences
In this chapter, we present the theory of consumer preferences on risky outcomes. The theory is then applied to study the demand for insurance. Consider the following story. John wants to mail a package
More informationEconomics 326: Duality and the Slutsky Decomposition. Ethan Kaplan
Economics 326: Duality and the Slutsky Decomposition Ethan Kaplan September 19, 2011 Outline 1. Convexity and Declining MRS 2. Duality and Hicksian Demand 3. Slutsky Decomposition 4. Net and Gross Substitutes
More information1. Briefly explain what an indifference curve is and how it can be graphically derived.
Chapter 2: Consumer Choice Short Answer Questions 1. Briefly explain what an indifference curve is and how it can be graphically derived. Answer: An indifference curve shows the set of consumption bundles
More informationLecture 2. Marginal Functions, Average Functions, Elasticity, the Marginal Principle, and Constrained Optimization
Lecture 2. Marginal Functions, Average Functions, Elasticity, the Marginal Principle, and Constrained Optimization 2.1. Introduction Suppose that an economic relationship can be described by a realvalued
More informationChapter 4 Online Appendix: The Mathematics of Utility Functions
Chapter 4 Online Appendix: The Mathematics of Utility Functions We saw in the text that utility functions and indifference curves are different ways to represent a consumer s preferences. Calculus can
More informationLecture 11 Uncertainty
Lecture 11 Uncertainty 1. Contingent Claims and the StatePreference Model 1) Contingent Commodities and Contingent Claims Using the simple twogood model we have developed throughout this course, think
More informationIndifference Curves and the Marginal Rate of Substitution
Introduction Introduction to Microeconomics Indifference Curves and the Marginal Rate of Substitution In microeconomics we study the decisions and allocative outcomes of firms, consumers, households and
More informationConsumer Theory. The consumer s problem
Consumer Theory The consumer s problem 1 The Marginal Rate of Substitution (MRS) We define the MRS(x,y) as the absolute value of the slope of the line tangent to the indifference curve at point point (x,y).
More informationAdvanced Microeconomics
Advanced Microeconomics Ordinal preference theory Harald Wiese University of Leipzig Harald Wiese (University of Leipzig) Advanced Microeconomics 1 / 68 Part A. Basic decision and preference theory 1 Decisions
More informationMathematics Course 111: Algebra I Part IV: Vector Spaces
Mathematics Course 111: Algebra I Part IV: Vector Spaces D. R. Wilkins Academic Year 19967 9 Vector Spaces A vector space over some field K is an algebraic structure consisting of a set V on which are
More informationIntermediate Microeconomics (22014)
Intermediate Microeconomics (22014) I. Consumer Instructor: Marc TeignierBaqué First Semester, 2011 Outline Part I. Consumer 1. umer 1.1 Budget Constraints 1.2 Preferences 1.3 Utility Function 1.4 1.5
More informationThe Envelope Theorem 1
John Nachbar Washington University April 2, 2015 1 Introduction. The Envelope Theorem 1 The Envelope theorem is a corollary of the KarushKuhnTucker theorem (KKT) that characterizes changes in the value
More informationDemand. Lecture 3. August 2015. Reading: Perlo Chapter 4 1 / 58
Demand Lecture 3 Reading: Perlo Chapter 4 August 2015 1 / 58 Introduction We saw the demand curve in chapter 2. We learned about consumer decision making in chapter 3. Now we bridge the gap between the
More informationOn Lexicographic (Dictionary) Preference
MICROECONOMICS LECTURE SUPPLEMENTS Hajime Miyazaki File Name: lexico95.usc/lexico99.dok DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY Fall 993/994/995 Miyazaki.@osu.edu On Lexicographic (Dictionary) Preference
More informationEconomics 101 Fall 2013 Answers to Homework 5 Due Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Economics 101 Fall 2013 Answers to Homework 5 Due Tuesday, November 19, 2013 Directions: The homework will be collected in a box before the lecture. Please place your name, TA name and section number on
More informationWhen the price of a good rises (falls) and all other variables affecting the
ONLINE APPENDIX 1 Substitution and Income Effects of a Price Change When the price of a good rises (falls) and all other variables affecting the consumer remain the same, the law of demand tells us that
More informationEconomics 326: Marshallian Demand and Comparative Statics. Ethan Kaplan
Economics 326: Marshallian Demand and Comparative Statics Ethan Kaplan September 17, 2012 Outline 1. Utility Maximization: General Formulation 2. Marshallian Demand 3. Homogeneity of Degree Zero of Marshallian
More informationInflation. Chapter 8. 8.1 Money Supply and Demand
Chapter 8 Inflation This chapter examines the causes and consequences of inflation. Sections 8.1 and 8.2 relate inflation to money supply and demand. Although the presentation differs somewhat from that
More informationThe fundamental question in economics is 2. Consumer Preferences
A Theory of Consumer Behavior Preliminaries 1. Introduction The fundamental question in economics is 2. Consumer Preferences Given limited resources, how are goods and service allocated? 1 3. Indifference
More informationOPRE 6201 : 2. Simplex Method
OPRE 6201 : 2. Simplex Method 1 The Graphical Method: An Example Consider the following linear program: Max 4x 1 +3x 2 Subject to: 2x 1 +3x 2 6 (1) 3x 1 +2x 2 3 (2) 2x 2 5 (3) 2x 1 +x 2 4 (4) x 1, x 2
More informationTastes and Indifference Curves
C H A P T E R 4 Tastes and Indifference Curves This chapter begins a 2chapter treatment of tastes or what we also call preferences. In the first of these chapters, we simply investigate the basic logic
More informationCHAPTER 4 Consumer Choice
CHAPTER 4 Consumer Choice CHAPTER OUTLINE 4.1 Preferences Properties of Consumer Preferences Preference Maps 4.2 Utility Utility Function Ordinal Preference Utility and Indifference Curves Utility and
More informationRevised Version of Chapter 23. We learned long ago how to solve linear congruences. ax c (mod m)
Chapter 23 Squares Modulo p Revised Version of Chapter 23 We learned long ago how to solve linear congruences ax c (mod m) (see Chapter 8). It s now time to take the plunge and move on to quadratic equations.
More informationMultivariable Calculus and Optimization
Multivariable Calculus and Optimization Dudley Cooke Trinity College Dublin Dudley Cooke (Trinity College Dublin) Multivariable Calculus and Optimization 1 / 51 EC2040 Topic 3  Multivariable Calculus
More informationLecture 6: Price discrimination II (Nonlinear Pricing)
Lecture 6: Price discrimination II (Nonlinear Pricing) EC 105. Industrial Organization. Fall 2011 Matt Shum HSS, California Institute of Technology November 14, 2012 EC 105. Industrial Organization. Fall
More informationUnraveling versus Unraveling: A Memo on Competitive Equilibriums and Trade in Insurance Markets
Unraveling versus Unraveling: A Memo on Competitive Equilibriums and Trade in Insurance Markets Nathaniel Hendren January, 2014 Abstract Both Akerlof (1970) and Rothschild and Stiglitz (1976) show that
More informationDemand for Food in the United States. A Review of Literature, Evaluation of Previous Estimates, and Presentation of New Estimates of Demand
Demand for Food in the United States A Review of Literature, Evaluation of Previous Estimates, and Presentation of New Estimates of Demand Abigail M. Okrent and Julian M. Alston Giannini Foundation Monograph
More informationPrice Elasticity of Supply; Consumer Preferences
1 Price Elasticity of Supply 1 14.01 Principles of Microeconomics, Fall 2007 ChiaHui Chen September 12, 2007 Lecture 4 Price Elasticity of Supply; Consumer Preferences Outline 1. Chap 2: Elasticity 
More informationREVIEW OF MICROECONOMICS
ECO 352 Spring 2010 Precepts Weeks 1, 2 Feb. 1, 8 REVIEW OF MICROECONOMICS Concepts to be reviewed Budget constraint: graphical and algebraic representation Preferences, indifference curves. Utility function
More informationDefinition and Properties of the Production Function: Lecture
Definition and Properties of the Production Function: Lecture II August 25, 2011 Definition and : Lecture A Brief Brush with Duality CobbDouglas Cost Minimization Lagrangian for the CobbDouglas Solution
More informationUNIT 2: CONSUMER EQUILIBRIUM AND DEMAND
KEY CONCEPTS UNIT 2: CONSUMER EQUILIBRIUM AND DEMAND 1. UTILITY A) MARGINAL UTILITY B) LAW OF DIMINISHING MARGINAL UTILITY 2. CONDITIONS OF CONSUMER S EQUILIBRIUM 3. INDIFFERENCE CURVE ANALYSIS 4. THE
More informationEconomics 200B Part 1 UCSD Winter 2015 Prof. R. Starr, Mr. John Rehbeck Final Exam 1
Economics 200B Part 1 UCSD Winter 2015 Prof. R. Starr, Mr. John Rehbeck Final Exam 1 Your Name: SUGGESTED ANSWERS Please answer all questions. Each of the six questions marked with a big number counts
More informationTo give it a definition, an implicit function of x and y is simply any relationship that takes the form:
2 Implicit function theorems and applications 21 Implicit functions The implicit function theorem is one of the most useful single tools you ll meet this year After a while, it will be second nature to
More informationMathematical Economics: Lecture 15
Mathematical Economics: Lecture 15 Yu Ren WISE, Xiamen University November 19, 2012 Outline 1 Chapter 20: Homogeneous and Homothetic Functions New Section Chapter 20: Homogeneous and Homothetic Functions
More informationSlutsky Equation. M. Utku Ünver Micro Theory. Boston College. M. Utku Ünver Micro Theory (BC) Slutsky Equation 1 / 15
Slutsky Equation M. Utku Ünver Micro Theory Boston College M. Utku Ünver Micro Theory (BC) Slutsky Equation 1 / 15 Effects of a Price Change: What happens when the price of a commodity decreases? 1 The
More informationThe Greater the Differences, the Greater the Gains?
The Greater the Differences, the Greater the Gains? Wilfred J. Ethier Department of Economics University of Pennsylvania First version: 30 November 2007 This printing: 21 April 2009 The Greater the Differences,
More informationAK 4 SLUTSKY COMPENSATION
AK 4 SLUTSKY COMPENSATION ECON 210 A. JOSEPH GUSE (1) (a) First calculate the demand at the original price p b = 2 b(p b,m) = 1000 20 5p b b 0 = b(2) = 40 In general m c = m+(p 1 b p0 b )b 0. If the price
More informationEconomics 2020a / HBS 4010 / HKS API111 Fall 2011 Practice Problems for Lectures 1 to 11
Economics 2020a / HBS 4010 / HKS API111 Fall 2011 Practice Problems for Lectures 1 to 11 LECTURE 1: BUDGETS AND REVEALED PREFERENCE 1.1. Quantity Discounts and the Budget Constraint Suppose that a consumer
More informationConstrained Optimisation
CHAPTER 9 Constrained Optimisation Rational economic agents are assumed to make choices that maximise their utility or profit But their choices are usually constrained for example the consumer s choice
More informationLecture 4: Equality Constrained Optimization. Tianxi Wang
Lecture 4: Equality Constrained Optimization Tianxi Wang wangt@essex.ac.uk 2.1 Lagrange Multiplier Technique (a) Classical Programming max f(x 1, x 2,..., x n ) objective function where x 1, x 2,..., x
More information1 Nonzero sum games and Nash equilibria
princeton univ. F 14 cos 521: Advanced Algorithm Design Lecture 19: Equilibria and algorithms Lecturer: Sanjeev Arora Scribe: Economic and gametheoretic reasoning specifically, how agents respond to economic
More informationMATRIX ALGEBRA AND SYSTEMS OF EQUATIONS
MATRIX ALGEBRA AND SYSTEMS OF EQUATIONS Systems of Equations and Matrices Representation of a linear system The general system of m equations in n unknowns can be written a x + a 2 x 2 + + a n x n b a
More information2. Information Economics
2. Information Economics In General Equilibrium Theory all agents had full information regarding any variable of interest (prices, commodities, state of nature, cost function, preferences, etc.) In many
More informationInteger roots of quadratic and cubic polynomials with integer coefficients
Integer roots of quadratic and cubic polynomials with integer coefficients Konstantine Zelator Mathematics, Computer Science and Statistics 212 Ben Franklin Hall Bloomsburg University 400 East Second Street
More informationEcon 101: Principles of Microeconomics Fall 2012
Problem 1: Use the following graph to answer the questions. a. From the graph, which good has the price change? Did the price go down or up? What is the fraction of the new price relative to the original
More informationNotes V General Equilibrium: Positive Theory. 1 Walrasian Equilibrium and Excess Demand
Notes V General Equilibrium: Positive Theory In this lecture we go on considering a general equilibrium model of a private ownership economy. In contrast to the Notes IV, we focus on positive issues such
More informationFrom preferences to numbers Cardinal v ordinal Examples MRS. Utility. Intermediate Micro. Lecture 4. Chapter 4 of Varian
Utility Intermediate Micro Lecture 4 Chapter 4 of Varian Preferences and decisionmaking 1. Last lecture: Ranking consumption bundles by preference/indifference 2. Today: Assigning values (numbers) to
More informationNoah Williams Economics 312. University of Wisconsin Spring 2013. Midterm Examination Solutions
Noah Williams Economics 31 Department of Economics Macroeconomics University of Wisconsin Spring 013 Midterm Examination Solutions Instructions: This is a 75 minute examination worth 100 total points.
More informationCHAPTER 3 CONSUMER BEHAVIOR
CHAPTER 3 CONSUMER BEHAVIOR EXERCISES 2. Draw the indifference curves for the following individuals preferences for two goods: hamburgers and beer. a. Al likes beer but hates hamburgers. He always prefers
More informationDeriving Demand Functions  Examples 1
Deriving Demand Functions  Examples 1 What follows are some examples of different preference relations and their respective demand functions. In all the following examples, assume we have two goods x
More informationUniversidad de Montevideo Macroeconomia II. The RamseyCassKoopmans Model
Universidad de Montevideo Macroeconomia II Danilo R. Trupkin Class Notes (very preliminar) The RamseyCassKoopmans Model 1 Introduction One shortcoming of the Solow model is that the saving rate is exogenous
More information1 Homogenous and Homothetic Functions
1 Homogenous and Homothetic Functions Reading: [Simon], Chapter 20, p. 483504. 1.1 Homogenous Functions Definition 1 A real valued function f(x 1,..., x n ) is homogenous of degree k if for all t > 0
More informationTopics in Consumer Theory
Chapter 4 Topics in Consumer Theory 4.1 Homothetic and Quasilinear Utility Functions One of the chief activities of economics is to try to recover a consumer s preferences over all bundles from observations
More informationMICROECONOMICS: DECISIONS
ECON 200A MICROECONOMICS: DECISIONS Fall 2015 Tuesday, Thursday 9:30am11:20pm Economics Bldg 200 Prof. Mark Machina Office: ECON 217 Office Hours: Tues,Thu 122pm TA: Paul Feldman ECON 119 Wed 9:0011:00
More informationCHAPTER 3 Numbers and Numeral Systems
CHAPTER 3 Numbers and Numeral Systems Numbers play an important role in almost all areas of mathematics, not least in calculus. Virtually all calculus books contain a thorough description of the natural,
More informationMATHEMATICS (CLASSES XI XII)
MATHEMATICS (CLASSES XI XII) General Guidelines (i) All concepts/identities must be illustrated by situational examples. (ii) The language of word problems must be clear, simple and unambiguous. (iii)
More information6. Budget Deficits and Fiscal Policy
Prof. Dr. Thomas Steger Advanced Macroeconomics II Lecture SS 2012 6. Budget Deficits and Fiscal Policy Introduction Ricardian equivalence Distorting taxes Debt crises Introduction (1) Ricardian equivalence
More informationMath Review. for the Quantitative Reasoning Measure of the GRE revised General Test
Math Review for the Quantitative Reasoning Measure of the GRE revised General Test www.ets.org Overview This Math Review will familiarize you with the mathematical skills and concepts that are important
More informationLecture Notes on Elasticity of Substitution
Lecture Notes on Elasticity of Substitution Ted Bergstrom, UCSB Economics 20A October 26, 205 Today s featured guest is the elasticity of substitution. Elasticity of a function of a single variable Before
More informationGeneral Equilibrium Theory: Examples
General Equilibrium Theory: Examples 3 examples of GE: pure exchange (Edgeworth box) 1 producer  1 consumer several producers and an example illustrating the limits of the partial equilibrium approach
More informationOn the Interaction and Competition among Internet Service Providers
On the Interaction and Competition among Internet Service Providers Sam C.M. Lee John C.S. Lui + Abstract The current Internet architecture comprises of different privately owned Internet service providers
More information24. The Branch and Bound Method
24. The Branch and Bound Method It has serious practical consequences if it is known that a combinatorial problem is NPcomplete. Then one can conclude according to the present state of science that no
More informationAt t = 0, a generic intermediary j solves the optimization problem:
Internet Appendix for A Model of hadow Banking * At t = 0, a generic intermediary j solves the optimization problem: max ( D, I H, I L, H, L, TH, TL ) [R (I H + T H H ) + p H ( H T H )] + [E ω (π ω ) A
More informationLecture 8 The Subjective Theory of Betting on Theories
Lecture 8 The Subjective Theory of Betting on Theories Patrick Maher Philosophy 517 Spring 2007 Introduction The subjective theory of probability holds that the laws of probability are laws that rational
More informationCommon sense, and the model that we have used, suggest that an increase in p means a decrease in demand, but this is not the only possibility.
Lecture 6: Income and Substitution E ects c 2009 Je rey A. Miron Outline 1. Introduction 2. The Substitution E ect 3. The Income E ect 4. The Sign of the Substitution E ect 5. The Total Change in Demand
More informationConstrained optimization.
ams/econ 11b supplementary notes ucsc Constrained optimization. c 2010, Yonatan Katznelson 1. Constraints In many of the optimization problems that arise in economics, there are restrictions on the values
More informationA FIRST COURSE IN OPTIMIZATION THEORY
A FIRST COURSE IN OPTIMIZATION THEORY RANGARAJAN K. SUNDARAM New York University CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Contents Preface Acknowledgements page xiii xvii 1 Mathematical Preliminaries 1 1.1 Notation
More information1 Portfolio mean and variance
Copyright c 2005 by Karl Sigman Portfolio mean and variance Here we study the performance of a oneperiod investment X 0 > 0 (dollars) shared among several different assets. Our criterion for measuring
More informationProbability and Expected Value
Probability and Expected Value This handout provides an introduction to probability and expected value. Some of you may already be familiar with some of these topics. Probability and expected value are
More informationConsumer Theory. Jonathan Levin and Paul Milgrom. October 2004
Consumer Theory Jonathan Levin and Paul Milgrom October 2004 1 The Consumer Problem Consumer theory is concerned with how a rational consumer would make consumption decisions. What makes this problem worthy
More informationMATH10212 Linear Algebra. Systems of Linear Equations. Definition. An ndimensional vector is a row or a column of n numbers (or letters): a 1.
MATH10212 Linear Algebra Textbook: D. Poole, Linear Algebra: A Modern Introduction. Thompson, 2006. ISBN 0534405967. Systems of Linear Equations Definition. An ndimensional vector is a row or a column
More informationThe Optimal Growth Problem
LECTURE NOTES ON ECONOMIC GROWTH The Optimal Growth Problem Todd Keister Centro de Investigación Económica, ITAM keister@itam.mx January 2005 These notes provide an introduction to the study of optimal
More informationconstraint. Let us penalize ourselves for making the constraint too big. We end up with a
Chapter 4 Constrained Optimization 4.1 Equality Constraints (Lagrangians) Suppose we have a problem: Maximize 5, (x 1, 2) 2, 2(x 2, 1) 2 subject to x 1 +4x 2 =3 If we ignore the constraint, we get the
More informationCV and EV Examples 1
CV and EV Examples 1 Before we do any examples, let s make sure we have CV and EV straight. They re similar, but not the exact same thing, and which is which can get confusing. Both deal with changes
More informationChapter 3 Consumer Behavior
Chapter 3 Consumer Behavior Read Pindyck and Rubinfeld (2013), Chapter 3 Microeconomics, 8 h Edition by R.S. Pindyck and D.L. Rubinfeld Adapted by Chairat Aemkulwat for Econ I: 2900111 1/29/2015 CHAPTER
More informationUNIT 2 MATRICES  I 2.0 INTRODUCTION. Structure
UNIT 2 MATRICES  I Matrices  I Structure 2.0 Introduction 2.1 Objectives 2.2 Matrices 2.3 Operation on Matrices 2.4 Invertible Matrices 2.5 Systems of Linear Equations 2.6 Answers to Check Your Progress
More informationSample Midterm Solutions
Sample Midterm Solutions Instructions: Please answer both questions. You should show your working and calculations for each applicable problem. Correct answers without working will get you relatively few
More informationSecond degree price discrimination
Bergals School of Economics Fall 1997/8 Tel Aviv University Second degree price discrimination Yossi Spiegel 1. Introduction Second degree price discrimination refers to cases where a firm does not have
More information