Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Suppose that a firm produces two different outputs, the quantities of which are represented by \(q_{1}\) and \(q_{2}\). In general, the firm's total costs can be represented by \(C\left(q_{1}, q_{2}\right) .\) This function exhibits economies of scope if \(C\left(q_{1}, 0\right)+C\left(0, q_{2}\right)>C\left(q_{1}, q_{2}\right)\) for all output levels of either good. a. Explain in words why this mathematical formulation implies that costs will be lower in this multiproduct firm than in two single-product firms producing each good separately. b. If the two outputs are actually the same good, we can define total output as \(q=q_{1}+q_{2}\). Suppose that in this case average cost \((=C / q)\) decreases as \(q\) increases. Show that this firm also enjoys economies of scope under the definition provided here.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Question: Based on the given solution, explain why a firm producing two different outputs will have lower costs than two single-product firms, and show that if these outputs are the same good and average cost decreases with total output, the firm enjoys economies of scope. Answer: A firm producing two different outputs will have lower costs than two single-product firms as it can utilize shared inputs, technologies, or other production processes when the two goods are produced together, leading to overall cost savings. If both outputs represent the same good and average cost decreases with total output, the firm enjoys economies of scope because the total cost of producing both goods in one firm is less than the sum of their separate production costs in two single-product firms.

Step by step solution

01

a. Explanation in words

The mathematical function given for economies of scope is \(C\left(q_{1}, 0\right)+C\left(0, q_{2}\right)>C\left(q_{1}, q_{2}\right)\). This condition implies that the combined cost of producing \(q_1\) and \(q_2\) in one firm (the multiproduct firm) is less than the cost of producing them separately in two single-product firms. In other words, the firm can more efficiently use its resources when producing both goods, so the joint production of \(q_1\) and \(q_2\) leads to cost savings. This is because the firm can utilize shared inputs, technologies, or other production processes when the two goods are produced together, making the overall cost lower than if they were produced separately.
02

b. Showining economies of scope when average cost decreases with total output

If both outputs represent the same good, then total output is given by \(q=q_{1}+q_{2}\). The average cost, which is the total cost divided by the total output, \((=C / q)\), decreases as the output (\(q\)) increases. Now, let's show that the firm enjoys economies of scope. Since average cost decreases as output increases, we can write: \(\frac{C\left(q_{1}+q_{2}\right)}{q_{1}+q_{2}} < \frac{C\left(q_{1}\right)}{q_{1}}\) Multiplying both sides by \(q_{1}(q_{1}+q_{2})\), we have: \(C\left(q_{1}+q_{2}\right)q_{1} < C\left(q_{1}\right)(q_{1}+q_{2})\) Similarly, since average cost also decreases as output increases, we can write: \(\frac{C\left(q_{1}+q_{2}\right)}{q_{1}+q_{2}} < \frac{C\left(q_{2}\right)}{q_{2}}\) Multiplying both sides by \(q_{2}(q_{1}+q_{2})\), we have: \(C\left(q_{1}+q_{2}\right)q_{2} < C\left(q_{2}\right)(q_{1}+q_{2})\) Now, add these two inequalities: \(C\left(q_{1}+q_{2}\right)q_{1} + C\left(q_{1}+q_{2}\right)q_{2} < C\left(q_{1}\right)(q_{1}+q_{2}) + C\left(q_{2}\right)(q_{1}+q_{2})\) Factor the left side of the inequality: \(C\left(q_{1}+q_{2}\right)(q_{1}+q_{2}) < C\left(q_{1}\right)(q_{1}+q_{2}) + C\left(q_{2}\right)(q_{1}+q_{2})\) Divide both sides by \((q_{1}+q_{2})\) to get: \(C\left(q_{1}+q_{2}\right) < C\left(q_{1}\right)+C\left(q_{2}\right)\) The inequality above shows that the firm enjoys economies of scope, as the total cost of producing \(q_1\) and \(q_2\) in one firm is less than the sum of their separate production costs in two single-product firms.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Suppose that a firm's fixed proportion production function is given by \\[ q=\min (5 k, 10 l) \\] a. Calculate the firm's long-run total, average, and marginal cost functions. b. Suppose that \(k\) is fixed at 10 in the short run. Calculate the firm's short-run total, average, and marginal cost functions. c. Suppose \(v=1\) and \(w=3 .\) Calculate this firm's long-run and short-run average and marginal cost curves.

A firm producing hockey sticks has a production function given by \\[ q=2 \sqrt{k l} \\] In the short run, the firm's amount of capital equipment is fixed at \(k=100 .\) The rental rate for \(k\) is \(v=\$ 1\), and the wage rate for \(l\) is \(w=\$ 4\) a. Calculate the firm's short-run total cost curve. Calculate the short-run average cost curve. b. What is the firm's short-run marginal cost function? What are the \(S C, S A C,\) and \(S M C\) for the firm if it produces 25 hockey sticks? Fifty hockey sticks? One hundred hockey sticks? Two hundred hockey sticks? c. Graph the \(S A C\) and the \(S M C\) curves for the firm. Indicate the points found in part (b). d. Where does the \(S M C\) curve intersect the \(S A C\) curve? Explain why the \(S M C\) curve will always intersect the \(S A C\) curve at its lowest point. Suppose now that capital used for producing hockey sticks is fixed at \(\bar{k}\) in the short run. c. Calculate the firm's total costs as a function of \(q, w, v,\) and \(\bar{k}\) f. Given \(q, w,\) and \(v,\) how should the capital stock be chosen to minimize total cost? g. Use your results from part (f) to calculate the long-run total cost of hockey stick production. h. For \(w=\mathrm{s} 4, v=\$ 1,\) graph the long-run total cost curve for hockey stick production. Show that this is an envelope for the short-run curves computed in part (c) by examining values of \(\bar{k}\) of \(100,200,\) and 400

An enterprising entrepreneur purchases two factories to produce widgets. Each factory produces identical products, and each has a production function given by \\[ q=\sqrt{k_{i} l_{i}}, \quad i=1,2 \\] The factories differ, however, in the amount of capital equipment each has, In particular, factory 1 has \(k_{1}=25,\) whereas factory 2 has \(k_{2}=100 .\) Rental rates for \(k\) and \(l\) are given by \(w=v=\$ 1\) a. If the entrepreneur wishes to minimize short-run total costs of widget production, how should output be allocated between the two factories? b. Given that output is optimally allocated between the two factories, calculate the short-run total, average, and marginal cost curves. What is the marginal cost of the 100 th widget? The 125 th widget? The 200 th widget? c. How should the entrepreneur allocate widget production between the two factories in the long run? Calculate the long-run total, average, and marginal cost curves for widget production. d. How would your answer to part (c) change if both factories exhibited diminishing returns to scale?

Many empirical studies of costs report an alternative definition of the elasticity of substitution between inputs. This alternative definition was first proposed by \(\mathrm{R}\). G. \(\mathrm{D}\). Allen in the 1930 s and further clarified by H. Uzawa in the 1960 s. This definition builds directly on the production function-based elasticity of substitution defined in footnote 6 of Chapter \(9: A_{i j}=C_{i j} C / C_{i} C_{j}\) where the subscripts indicate partial differentiation with respect to various input prices. Clearly, the Allen definition is symmetric. a. Show that \(A_{i j}=e_{x_{i}, \ldots, n} / s_{j},\) where \(s_{j}\) is the share of input \(j\) in total cost. b. Show that the elasticity of \(s_{i}\) with respect to the price of input \(j\) is related to the Allen elasticity by \(e_{s_{1}, p_{1}}=s_{j}\left(A_{j}-1\right)\) c. Show that, with only two inputs, \(A_{k l}=1\) for the Cobb-Douglas case and \(A_{k l}=\sigma\) for the CFS case. d. Read Blackorby and Russell (1989: "Will the Real Elasticity of Substitution Please Stand Up?") to see why the Morishima definition is preferred for most purposes.

Professor Smith and Professor Jones are going to produce a new introductory textbook. As true scientists, they have laid out the production function for the book as \\[ q=S^{1 / 2} J^{1 / 2} \\] where \(q=\) the number of pages in the finished book, \(S=\) the number of working hours spent by Smith, and \(J=\) the number of hours spent working by Jones. After having spent 900 hours preparing the first draft, time which he valued at \(\$ 3\) per working hour, Smith has to move on to other things and cannot contribute any more to the book. Jones, whose labor is valued at \(\$ 12\) per working hour, will revise Smith's draft to complete the book. a. How many hours will Jones have to spend to produce a finished book of 150 pages? Of 300 pages? Of 450 pages? b. What is the marginal cost of the 150 th page of the finished book? Of the 300 th page? Of the 450 th page?

See all solutions

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free