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

As we saw in Figure \(3.5,\) one way to show convexity of indifference curves is to show that, for any two points \(\left(x_{1}, y_{1}\right)\) and \(\left(x_{2}, y_{2}\right)\) on an indifference curve that promises \(U=k\), the utility associated with the point \(\left(\frac{x_{1}+x_{2}}{2}, \frac{y_{1}+y_{2}}{2}\right)\) is at least as great as \(k\). Use this approach to discuss the convexity of the indifference curves for the following three functions. Be sure to graph your results. a. \(U(x, y)=\min (x, y)\) b. \(U(x, y)=\max (x, y)\) c. \(U(x, y)=x+y\)

Short Answer

Expert verified
Based on the analysis of the given utility functions, determine if the associated indifference curves are convex. Utility function: U(x, y) = min(x, y) Answer: The indifference curve for U(x, y) = min(x, y) is not strictly convex, but it shows a non-linear relationship between x and y. Utility function: U(x, y) = max(x, y) Answer: The indifference curve for U(x, y) = max(x, y) is not strictly convex, but it shows a non-linear relationship between x and y. Utility function: U(x, y) = x + y Answer: The indifference curve for U(x, y) = x + y is convex, as the consumer always prefers more of both goods.

Step by step solution

01

Utility function U(x, y) = min(x, y)

To examine the convexity of the indifference curve under this given utility function, we first find the utility associated with the midpoint between points \((x_1, y_1)\) and \((x_2, y_2)\): $$U\left(\frac{x_1+x_2}{2}, \frac{y_1+y_2}{2}\right) = \min\left(\frac{x_1+x_2}{2}, \frac{y_1+y_2}{2}\right)$$ Now, we need to compare this utility value to \(k\). If the value is greater than or equal to \(k\), the indifference curve is convex. The utility function has \(U(x, y) = k\), which implies that \(k = \min(x, y)\) for the two points \((x_1, y_1)\) and \((x_2, y_2)\). We can write these conditions as: $$k = \min(x_1, y_1) \quad \text{and} \quad k = \min(x_2, y_2)$$ Under these conditions, it can be deduced that the midpoint utility is greater than or equal to \(k\), implying a convex indifference curve for \(U(x, y) = \min(x, y)\).
02

Utility function U(x, y) = max(x, y)

We follow the same process as in Step 1 to evaluate the convexity of the indifference curve under this utility function: $$U\left(\frac{x_1+x_2}{2}, \frac{y_1+y_2}{2}\right) = \max\left(\frac{x_1+x_2}{2}, \frac{y_1+y_2}{2}\right)$$ Given that the utility for participants in \((x_1, y_1)\) and \((x_2, y_2)\) is \(k\), we have \(k = \max(x_1, y_1)\) and \(k = \max(x_2, y_2)\). Under these conditions, it can be deduced that the midpoint utility is greater than or equal to \(k\), implying a convex indifference curve for \(U(x, y) = \max(x, y)\).
03

Utility function U(x, y) = x + y

As before, we first find the utility associated with the midpoint between points \((x_1, y_1)\) and \((x_2, y_2)\): $$U\left(\frac{x_1+x_2}{2}, \frac{y_1+y_2}{2}\right) = \frac{x_1+x_2}{2} + \frac{y_1+y_2}{2}$$ The utility of participants in \((x_1, y_1)\) and \((x_2, y_2)\) is \(k\), which implies that \(k = x_1 + y_1\) and \(k = x_2 + y_2\). Under these conditions, we can deduce that the midpoint utility is exactly \(k\), implying a convex indifference curve for \(U(x, y) = x + y\).
04

Graph the results

To provide a visual representation of the convex indifference curves for each utility function, create graphs to showcase the curves: For \(U(x, y)=\min(x, y)\), draw 45-degree diagonal lines as the indifference curves. These curves are not strictly convex but show a non-linear relationship between \(x\) and \(y\). For \(U(x, y)=\max(x, y)\), similar to the previous example, the indifference curves will be 45-degree diagonal lines. These curves are also not strictly convex, but show a non-linear relationship between \(x\) and \(y\). For \(U(x, y)=x + y\), the indifference curves will be downward-sloping straight lines. Since they run parallel to each other, they imply that the consumer always prefers more of both goods and the resulting indifference curves are convex. In conclusion, by analyzing the convexity of indifference curves associated with different utility functions, we can better understand the consumer preferences and the properties of these functions.

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!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Microeconomic Theory
Microeconomic theory is a branch of economics that deals with the behavior of individual economic agents, such as consumers, firms, and workers, and the markets where they interact. It tries to understand how these agents make decisions given their preferences, the resources they have, and the rules of the institutions they operate in.

Within microeconomics, the concept of indifference curves is crucial. These curves represent different combinations of two goods that provide the same level of utility—or happiness—to a consumer. The convexity of these curves is related to the idea of the diminishing marginal rate of substitution, meaning, as a consumer substitutes one good for another, the amount of the second good they are willing to give up decreases. This reflects a general preference for balanced consumption rather than extremes.
Utility Function
A utility function in microeconomics quantifies the satisfaction or happiness a consumer derives from consuming goods and services. These functions help economists model consumer preferences and predict consumer behavior. Utility can be a tricky concept because it doesn't have a standard unit of measurement like meters for distance or kilograms for weight. Still, it allows for the comparison of different levels of satisfaction.

The exercise presents different utility functions, such as the minimum or maximum of two goods and their sum. By examining these functions, economists can determine an individual's preferred consumption bundle. It's important to note that while utility functions can be complex, the idea behind them is to simplify consumer choices into a format that can be easily analyzed and compared.
Consumer Preferences
Consumer preferences refer to the subjective tastes, as measured by the utility function, that govern the choice of one good or combination of goods over another. These preferences are assumed to be complete (the consumer can always say which of two alternatives they prefer or if they're indifferent), transitive (if option A is preferred to B, and B is preferred to C, then A is preferred to C), and more is preferred to less (more of a good is better, holding everything else constant).

The convexity of indifference curves is directly linked to the assumption that consumers prefer a diverse bundle of goods, as they prefer variety and balance in their consumption patterns. These concepts of consumer preferences play a huge role in shaping market dynamics and influencing how companies offer products and services. By understanding the preferences of consumers, businesses can optimize their offerings to match what their customers value most.

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

Two goods have independent marginal utilities if \\[ \frac{\partial^{2} U}{\partial y \partial x}=\frac{\partial^{2} U}{\partial x \partial y}=0 \\] Show that if we assume diminishing marginal utility for each good, then any utility function with independent marginal utilities will have a diminishing \(M R S\). Provide an example to show that the converse of this statement is not true.

The Phillie Phanatic (PP) always eats his ballpark franks in a special way; he uses a foot-long hot dog together with precisely half a bun, 1 ounce of mustard, and 2 ounces of pickle relish. His utility is a function only of these four items, and any extra amount of a single item without the other constituents is worthless. a. What form does PP's utility function for these four goods have? b. How might we simplify matters by considering PP's utility to be a function of only one good? What is that good? c. Suppose foot-long hot dogs cost \(\$ 1.00\) each, buns cost \(\$ 0.50\) each, mustard costs \(\$ 0.05\) per ounce, and pickle relish costs S0.15 per ounce. How much does the good defined in part (b) cost? d. If the price of foot-long hot dogs increases by 50 percent (to \(\$ 1.50\) each), what is the percentage increase in the price of the good? How would a 50 percent increase in the price of a bun affect the price of the good? Why is your answer different from part (d)? f. If the government wanted to raise \(\$ 1.00\) by taxing the goods that \(\mathrm{PP}\) buys, how should it spread this tax over the four goods so as to minimize the utility cost to PP?

In a 1992 article David G. Luenberger introduced what he termed the benefit function as a way of incorporating some degree of cardinal measurement into utility theory." The author asks us to specify a certain elementary consumption bundle and then measure how many replications of this bundle would need to be provided to an individual to raise his or her utility level to a particular target. Suppose there are only two goods and that the utility target is given by \(U^{*}(x, y)\). Suppose also that the elementary consumption bundle is given by \(\left(x_{0}, y_{0}\right)\). Then the value of the benefit function, \(b\left(U^{*}\right)\), is that value of \(\alpha\) for which \(U\left(\alpha x_{0}, \alpha y_{0}\right)=U^{*}\) a Suppose utility is given by \(U(x, y)=x^{8} y^{1-\beta}\). Calculate the benefit function for \(x_{0}=y_{0}=1\) b. Using the utility function from part (a), calculate the benefit function for \(x_{0}=1, y_{0}=0 .\) Explain why your results differ from those in part (a). c. The benefit function can also be defined when an individual has initial endowments of the two goods. If these initial endowments are given by \(\bar{x}, \bar{y},\) then \(b\left(U^{*}, \bar{x}, \bar{y}\right)\) is given by that value of \(\alpha\) which satisfies the equation \(\left.U\left(x+\alpha x_{0}, y+\alpha y_{0}\right)=U^{*}, \text { In this situation the "benefit" can be either positive (when } U(x, y)U^{*}\right) .\) Develop a graphical description of these two possibilities, and explain how the nature of the elementary bundle may affect the benefit calculation. d. Consider two possible initial endowments, \(\bar{x}_{1}, \bar{y}_{1}\) and \(\bar{x}_{2}, \bar{y}_{2}\). Explain both graphically and intuitively why \(b\left(U^{*}, \frac{\bar{x}_{1}+\bar{x}_{2}}{2}, \frac{\bar{y}_{1}+\bar{y}_{2}}{2}\right)<0.5 b\left(U^{*}, \bar{x}_{1}, \bar{y}_{1}\right)+0.5 b\left(U^{*}, \bar{x}_{2}, \bar{y}_{2}\right) .\) (Note. This shows that the benefit function is concave in the initial endowments.

Example 3.3 shows that the \(M R S\) for the Cobb-Douglas function \\[ U(x, y)=x^{a} y^{\beta} \\] is given by \\[ M R S=\frac{\alpha}{\beta}\left(\frac{y}{x}\right) \\] a Does this result depend on whether \(\alpha+\beta=1 ?\) Does this sum have any relevance to the theory of choice? b. For commodity bundles for which \(y=x\), how does the \(M R S\) depend on the values of \(\alpha\) and \(\beta\) ? Develop an intuitive explanation of why, if \(\alpha>\beta, M R S>1 .\) Illustrate your argument with a graph. c. Suppose an individual obtains utility only from amounts of \(x\) and \(y\) that exceed minimal subsistence levels given by \(x_{0}, y_{0}\) In this case, \\[ U(x, y)=\left(x-x_{0}\right)^{a}\left(y-y_{0}\right)^{\beta} \\] Is this function homothetic? (For a further discussion, see the Extensions to Chapter \(4 .\) )

The formal study of preferences uses a general vector notation. A bundle of \(n\) commoditics is denoted by the vector \(\mathbf{x}=\left(x_{1}, x_{2}, \ldots, x_{n}\right),\) and a preference relation \((>)\) is defined over all potential bundles. The statement \(\mathbf{x}^{1}>\mathbf{x}^{2}\) means that bundle \(\mathbf{x}^{1}\) is preferred to bundle \(\mathbf{x}^{2}\). Indifference between two such bundles is denoted by \(\mathbf{x}^{1} \approx \mathbf{x}^{2}\) The preference relation is "complete" if for any two bundles the individual is able to state cither \(\mathbf{x}^{1}>\mathbf{x}^{2}, \mathbf{x}^{2}>\mathbf{x}^{1}\), or \(\mathbf{x}^{1} \approx\) \(\mathbf{x}^{2}\). The relation is "transitive" if \(\mathbf{x}^{1}>\mathbf{x}^{2}\) and \(\mathbf{x}^{2}>\mathbf{x}^{3}\) implies that \(\mathbf{x}^{1}>\mathbf{x}^{3}\), Finally, a preference relation is "continuous" if for any bundle \(y\) such that \(y>x\), any bundle suitably close to \(y\) will also be preferred to \(x\). Using these definitions, discuss whether each of the following preference relations is complete, transitive, and continuous. a Summation preferences: This preference relation assumes one can indeed add apples and oranges. Specifically, \(\mathbf{x}^{1}>\mathbf{x}^{2}\) if and only if \(\sum_{i=1}^{n} x_{i}^{1}>\sum_{i=1}^{n} x_{i}^{2} .\) If \(\sum_{i=1}^{n} x_{i}^{1}=\sum_{i=1}^{n} x_{i}^{2}, \mathbf{x}^{1} \approx \mathbf{x}^{2}\) b. Lexicographic preferences: In this case the preference relation is organized as a dictionary: If \(x_{1}^{1}>x_{1}^{2}, x^{1} \succ x^{2}\) (regardless of the amounts of the other \(n-1\) goods). If \(x_{1}^{1}=x_{1}^{2}\) and \(x_{2}^{1}>x_{2}^{2}, x^{1}>x^{2}\) (regardless of the amounts of the other \(n-2\) goods). The lexicographic preference relation then continues in this way throughout the entire list of goods. c. Preferences with satiation: For this preference relation there is assumed to be a consumption bundle (x") that provides complete "bliss." The ranking of all other bundles is determined by how close they are to \(\mathbf{x}^{*}\), That is, \(\mathbf{x}^{1}>\mathbf{x}^{2}\) if and only if \\[ \left|\mathbf{x}^{1}-\mathbf{x}^{*}\right|<\left|\mathbf{x}^{2}-\mathbf{x}^{\prime}\right| \text { where }\left|\mathbf{x}^{l}-\mathbf{x}^{*}\right|=\sqrt{\left(x_{1}^{\prime}-x_{1}^{*}\right)^{2}+\left(x_{2}^{\prime}-x_{x}^{*}\right)^{2}+\ldots+\left(x_{n}^{\prime}-x_{n}^{*}\right)^{2}} \\]

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

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