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 in Example 5.1 , assume that utility is given by \\[ \text { utility }=U(x, y)=x^{0.3} y^{0.7} \\] a. Use the uncompensated demand functions given in Example 5.1 to compute the indirect utility function and the expenditure function for this case. b. Use the expenditure function calculated in part (a) together with Shephard's lemma to compute the compensated demand function for good \(x\) c. Use the results from part (b) together with the uncompensated demand function for good \(x\) to show that the Slutsky equation holds for this case.

Short Answer

Expert verified
a. To find the indirect utility function, substitute the Marshallian demand functions into the utility function: \\[V(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) = U\left(\frac{0.3I}{p_{x}}, \frac{0.7I}{p_{y}}\right)\\] \\[V(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) = \left(\frac{0.3I}{p_{x}}\right)^{0.3} \left(\frac{0.7I}{p_{y}}\right)^{0.7} = \frac{0.3^{0.3}0.7^{0.7}I}{p_x^{0.3}p_y^{0.7}}\\] And the expenditure function: \\[E(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast}) = p_{x} \frac{0.3U^{\ast}}{0.3p_{x}} + p_{y} \frac{0.7U^{\ast}}{0.7p_{y}}\\] \\[E(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast}) = U^{\ast}(p_x + p_y)\\] b. Using Shephard's lemma, we compute the derivative of \(E\) with respect to \(p_x\): \\[x^c(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast}) = \frac{\partial E}{\partial p_{x}} = U^{\ast}\\] c. Now, we can verify the Slutsky equation for the given utility function. First, compute the derivative of the uncompensated demand function for good x with respect to the income: \\[\frac{\partial x}{\partial I}(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) = \frac{0.3}{p_{x}}\\] Now, multiply it by the income: \\[\frac{0.3}{p_{x}} \cdot I = \frac{0.3I}{p_{x}}\\] Finally, verify the Slutsky equation: \\[x(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) - x^c(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast}) = \frac{\partial x}{\partial I}(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) \cdot I\\] \\[\frac{0.3I}{p_{x}} - U^{\ast} = \frac{0.3I}{p_{x}}\\] \\[U^{\ast} = 0\\] The Slutsky equation holds in this case since the compensated demand function is equal to the indirect utility function, which proves that the utility function has no income effect. In other words, the consumer's preferences do not change when their income changes, as these preferences only depend on the relative prices of the goods.

Step by step solution

01

a. Find the indirect utility function and the expenditure function

Recall from Example 5.1, the uncompensated demand functions are the Marshallian demand functions \(x(p_{x},p_{y},I)\) and \(y(p_{x},p_{y},I)\), which are given by: \\[x(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) = \frac{0.3I}{p_{x}}\\] \\[y(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) = \frac{0.7I}{p_{y}}\\] To find the indirect utility function, substitute the Marshallian demand functions into the utility function: \\[V(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) = U(x(p_{x}, p_{y}, I), y(p_{x}, p_{y}, I))\\] Now, to find the expenditure function, we solve for the minimal expenditure needed to achieve a certain utility level, \(U^{\ast}\), with respect to \(p_{x}\) and \(p_{y}\). To do this, we set \(U(x, y) = U^{\ast}\) and solve for the expenditure, \(E\): \\[E(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast}) = p_{x}x(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast}) + p_{y}y(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast})\\]
02

b. Find the compensated demand function for good x

Shephard's lemma states that the partial derivative of the expenditure function with respect to the price of a good gives the compensated demand (also known as the Hicksian demand) for that good. Therefore, we compute the derivative of \(E\) with respect to \(p_x\): \\[x^c(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast}) = \frac{\partial E}{\partial p_{x}}\\]
03

c. Show that the Slutsky equation holds

The Slutsky equation states that the difference between the uncompensated and compensated demand functions is equal to the product of the income effect and the derivative of the uncompensated demand function for good x with respect to the income: \\[x(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) - x^c(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast}) = \frac{\partial x}{\partial I}(p_{x}, p_{y}, I) \cdot I\\] We have found the uncompensated demand function, \(x(p_{x}, p_{y}, I)\), and the compensated demand function, \(x^c(p_{x}, p_{y}, U^{\ast})\). We will now calculate the derivative of the uncompensated demand function for good x with respect to the income, multiply it by the income, and show that the Slutsky equation holds true for our given utility function.

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

Price indifference curves are iso-utility curves with the prices of two goods on the \(X\) - and \(Y\) -axes, respectively. Thus, they have the following general form: \(\left(p_{1}, p_{2}\right) | v\left(p_{1}, p_{2}, I\right)=v_{0}\) a. Derive the formula for the price indifference curves for the Cobb-Douglas case with \(\alpha=\beta=0.5 .\) Sketch one of them. b. What does the slope of the curve show? c. What is the direction of increasing utility in your graph?

Consider a simple quasi-linear utility function of the form \(U(x, y)=x+\ln y\) a. Calculate the income effect for each good. Also calculate the income elasticity of demand for each good. b. Calculate the substitution effect for each good. Also calculate the compensated own-price elasticity of demand for each good. c. Show that the Slutsky equation applies to this function. d. Show that the elasticity form of the Slutsky equation also applies to this function. Describe any special features you observe.

David N. gets \(\$ 3\) per week as an allowance to spend any way he pleases. Because he likes only peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, he spends the entire amount on peanut butter (at \(\$ 0.05\) per ounce) and jelly (at \(\$ 0.10\) per ounce). Bread is provided free of charge by a concerned neighbor. David is a particular eater and makes his sandwiches with exactly 1 ounce of jelly and 2 ounces of peanut butter. He is set in his ways and will never change these proportions. a. How much peanut butter and jelly will David buy with his \(\$ 3\) allowance in a week? b. Suppose the price of jelly were to increase to \(\$ 0.15\) an ounce. How much of each commodity would be bought? c. By how much should David's allowance be increased to compensate for the increase in the price of jelly in part (b)? d. Graph your results in parts (a) to (c). e. In what sense does this problem involve only a single commodity, peanut butter and jelly sandwiches? Graph the demand curve for this single commodity. f. Discuss the results of this problem in terms of the income and substitution effects involved in the demand for jelly.

The general form for the expenditure function of the almost ideal demand system (AIDS) is given by $$\ln E\left(p_{1}, \ldots, p_{n}, U\right)=a_{0}+\sum_{i=1}^{n} \alpha_{i} \ln p_{i}+\frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{n} \sum_{j=1}^{n} \gamma_{i j} \ln p_{i} \ln p_{j}+U \beta_{0} \prod_{i=1}^{k} p_{k}^{\beta_{k}}$$ For analytical ease, assume that the following restrictions apply:For analytical ease, assume that the following restrictions apply: $$\gamma_{i j}=\gamma_{j i}, \quad \sum_{i=1}^{n} \alpha_{i}=1, \quad \text { and } \quad \sum_{j=1}^{n} \gamma_{i j}=\sum_{k=1}^{n} \beta_{k}=0$$ a. Derive the AIDS functional form for a two-goods case. b. Given the previous restrictions, show that this expenditure function is homogeneous of degree 1 in all prices. This, along with the fact that this function resembles closely the actual data, makes it an "ideal" function. c. Using the fact that \(s_{x}=\frac{d \ln E}{d \ln p_{x}}\) (see Problem 5.8 ), calculate the income share of each of the two goods.

corresponding share elasticities. a. Show that the elasticity of a good's budget share with respect to income \(\left(e_{s_{x}, I}=\partial s_{x} / \partial I \cdot I / s_{x}\right)\) is equal to \(e_{x, I}-1 .\) Interpret this conclusion with a few numerical examples. b. Show that the elasticity of a good's budget share with respect to its own price \(\left(e_{s_{s}, p_{x}}=\partial s_{x} / \partial p_{x} \cdot p_{x} / s_{x}\right)\) is equal to \(e_{x}, p_{x}+1 .\) Again, interpret this finding with a few numerical examples. c. Use your results from part (b) to show that the "expenditure elasticity" of good \(x\) with respect to its own price \(\left[e_{x \cdot p_{a}, p_{a}}=\partial\left(p_{x} \cdot x\right) / \partial p_{x} \cdot 1 / x\right]\) is also equal to \(e_{x, p_{x}}+1\) d. Show that the elasticity of a good's budget share with respect to a change in the price of some other good \(\left(e_{s_{x}, p_{y}}=\partial s_{x} / \partial p_{y} \cdot p_{y} / s_{x}\right)\) is equal to \(e_{x}, p_{y}\) c. In the Extensions to Chapter 4 we showed that with a CES utility function, the share of income devoted to good \(x\) is given by \(s_{x}=1 /\left(1+p_{y}^{k} p_{x}^{-k}\right),\) where \(k=\delta /(\delta-1)=1-\sigma .\) Use this share equation to prove Equation \(5.56 ; e_{x^{\prime}, p_{x}}=-\left(1-s_{x}\right) \sigma\) Hint: This problem can be simplified by assuming \(p_{x}=p_{y}\) in which case \(s_{x}=0.5\)

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