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

Example 6.3 computes the demand functions implied by the three-good CES utility function \\[U(x, y, z)=-\frac{1}{x}-\frac{1}{y}-\frac{1}{z}.\\] a. Use the demand function for \(x\) in Equation 6.32 to determine whether \(x\) and \(y\) or \(x\) and \(z\) are gross substitutes or gross complements. b. How would you determine whether \(x\) and \(y\) or \(x\) and \(z\) are net substitutes or net complements?

Short Answer

Expert verified
What about net substitutes or net complements? Answer: Neither \(x\) and \(y\) nor \(x\) and \(z\) are gross substitutes or gross complements, as their cross-derivatives of the demand functions are zero, indicating that the demand of \(x\) does not change if the price of \(y\) or \(z\) changes. Similarly, neither \(x\) and \(y\) nor \(x\) and \(z\) are net substitutes or net complements, since their compensated demand functions remain the same as their ordinary demand functions.

Step by step solution

01

Calculate the Demand Functions

To calculate the demand functions for the three-good CES, we first need to find the marginal rates of substitution. The given utility function is: $$ U(x, y, z) = -\frac{1}{x} -\frac{1}{y} -\frac{1}{z} $$ First, we find the partial derivatives of the utility function with respect to each good. $$ \begin{aligned} \frac{\partial U}{\partial x} &= \frac{1}{x^2}\\\\ \frac{\partial U}{\partial y} &= \frac{1}{y^2}\\\\ \frac{\partial U}{\partial z} &= \frac{1}{z^2} \end{aligned} $$ Next, we find the marginal rate of substitution between each pair of goods by taking the ratio of their respective partial derivatives: $$ \begin{aligned} MRS_{xy} &= \frac{\partial U / \partial x}{\partial U / \partial y} = \frac{x^2}{y^2}\\\\ MRS_{xz} &= \frac{\partial U / \partial x}{\partial U / \partial z} = \frac{x^2}{z^2} \end{aligned} $$ Now, we must find the demand functions for \(x, y\) using both \(MRS_{xy}\) and \(MRS_{xz}\).
02

Examine Cross-Derivatives

To determine whether \(x\) and \(y\) or \(x\) and \(z\) are gross substitutes or gross complements, we should examine the cross-derivatives of the demand functions for \(x\) with respect to \(y\) and with respect to \(z\): $$ \begin{aligned} \frac{\partial}{\partial y} D_x(P_x, P_y, P_z, I) &= -\frac{I}{P_x} \frac{\partial MRS_{xy}}{\partial y}\\\\ \frac{\partial}{\partial z} D_x(P_x, P_y, P_z, I) &= -\frac{I}{P_x} \frac{\partial MRS_{xz}}{\partial z} \end{aligned} $$ Taking the partial derivatives of \(MRS_{xy}\) and \(MRS_{xz}\): $$ \begin{aligned} \frac{\partial MRS_{xy}}{\partial y} &= 0\\\\ \frac{\partial MRS_{xz}}{\partial z} &= 0 \end{aligned} $$ Now we have: $$ \begin{aligned} \frac{\partial}{\partial y} D_x(P_x, P_y, P_z, I) &= 0\\\\ \frac{\partial}{\partial z} D_x(P_x, P_y, P_z, I) &= 0 \end{aligned} $$ These derivatives indicate that neither \(x\) and \(y\) nor \(x\) and \(z\) are gross substitutes or gross complements. Since the cross-derivatives are zero, the demand of \(x\) does not change if the price of \(y\) or \(z\) changes.
03

Determining Net Substitutes or Net Complements

To determine whether \(x\) and \(y\) or \(x\) and \(z\) are net substitutes or net complements, we would need to find the compensated demand function. This can be done by applying Hicksian demand approach, which requires that we know the change in income resulting from a price change. In this particular problem, since neither \(x\) and \(y\) nor \(x\) and \(z\) are gross substitutes or gross complements, their compensated demand functions will remain the same as their ordinary demand functions. As a result, \(x\) and \(y\) or \(x\) and \(z\) are not net substitutes or net complements either.

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.

Marginal Rate of Substitution
Understanding the Marginal Rate of Substitution (MRS) is crucial when analyzing consumer choice and preference between two goods. The MRS represents the rate at which a consumer is willing to substitute one good for another while maintaining the same level of utility. It is calculated by taking the ratio of the marginal utilities of two goods.

For example, in a CES (Constant Elasticity of Substitution) utility function such as the one given by \(U(x, y, z) = -\frac{1}{x} -\frac{1}{y} -\frac{1}{z}\), we can find the MRS by taking the partial derivatives of the utility function with respect to each good and forming ratios, like so:

\[MRS_{xy} = \frac{\frac{\text{\text{d}}U}{\text{\text{d}}x}}{\frac{\text{\text{d}}U}{\text{\text{d}}y}} = \frac{x^2}{y^2}\]
\[MRS_{xz} = \frac{\frac{\text{\text{d}}U}{\text{\text{d}}x}}{\frac{\text{\text{d}}U}{\text{\text{d}}z}} = \frac{x^2}{z^2}\]

These formulas yield the rate at which x can be substituted for y or z without changing the utility level. A lower MRS implies that a consumer is willing to give up less of one good for the other. Conversely, a higher MRS means the consumer would need to give up more of one good to obtain another unit of the second good, signaling a preference for the latter.
Gross Substitutes and Complements
The concepts of gross substitutes and gross complements pertain to how demand for one good responds to price changes in another good in a consumer's basket. Two goods are considered gross substitutes if an increase in the price of one good leads to an increase in the demand for another good. Conversely, two goods are gross complements if an increase in the price of one good causes a decrease in the demand for another good.

For the CES utility function provided, to clarify whether goods are gross substitutes or complements, we would analyze the cross-partial derivatives of the demand functions. In this case, we found that:

\[\frac{\text{\text{d}}}{\text{\text{d}}y} D_x(P_x, P_y, P_z, I) = 0\]
\[\frac{\text{\text{d}}}{\text{\text{d}}z} D_x(P_x, P_y, P_z, I) = 0\]

As both derivatives are zero, this indicates that goods x and y, as well as x and z, do not react to the price changes of each other. Therefore, they are neither gross substitutes nor gross complements in this scenario. However, it's important to note that this is a specific case due to the constant marginal rates of substitution in the CES utility function.
Compensated Demand Function
The compensated demand function adjust a consumer's demand based on their income and price changes to keep their level of utility constant; it reflects the concept of consumer's 'real' choice unaffected by income effects. This is also known as the Hicksian demand function. To identify it, we generally apply the Hicksian demand approach and factor in how an income change affects demand, compensating to hold utility constant.

In the context of the CES utility function problem, since we've determined that neither x and y, nor x and z are gross substitutes or gross complements, the compensated demand function would match the ordinary demand function. This implies that there would be no change in the quantity demanded of x when the prices of y or z change, even after adjusting for income effects.

Interestingly, this outcome tells us that for this utility function, the goods in question do not exhibit the characteristics of net substitutes or net complements. Essentially, this simplification in the CES utility function underscores the importance of understanding the impact of both price and income changes on consumer demand through the lens of the compensated demand function.

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

Graphing complements is complicated because a complementary relationship between goods (under Hicks' definition) cannot occur with only two goods. Rather, complementarity necessarily involves the demand relationships among three (or more) goods. In his review of complementarity, Samuelson provides a way of illustrating the concept with a two-dimensional indifference curve diagram (see the Suggested Readings). To examine this construction, assume there are three goods that a consumer might choose. The quantities of these are denoted by \(x_{1}, x_{2},\) and \(x_{3} .\) Now proceed as follows. a. Draw an indifference curve for \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3},\) holding the quantity of \(x_{1}\) constant at \(x_{1}^{0} .\) This indifference curve will have the customary convex shape. b. Now draw a second (higher) indifference curve for \(x_{2}, x_{3},\) holding \(x_{1}\) constant at \(x_{1}^{0}-h .\) For this new indifference curve, show the amount of extra \(x_{2}\) that would compensate this person for the loss of \(x_{1} ;\) call this amount \(j .\) Similarly, show that amount of extra \(x_{3}\) that would compensate for the loss of \(x_{1}\) and call this amount \(k\) c. Suppose now that an individual is given both amounts \(j\) and \(k\), thereby permitting him or her to move to an even higher \(x_{2}, x_{3}\) indifference curve. Show this move on your graph, and draw this new indifference curve. d. Samuelson now suggests the following definitions: If the new indifference curve corresponds to the indifference curve when \(x_{1}=x_{1}^{0}-2 h,\) goods 2 and 3 are independent. If the new indifference curve provides more utility than when \(x_{1}=x_{1}^{0}-2 h,\) goods 2 and 3 are complements. If the new indifference curve provides less utility than when \(x_{1}=x_{1}^{0}-2 h,\) goods 2 and 3 are substitutes. Show that these graphical definitions are symmetric. e. Discuss how these graphical definitions correspond to Hicks' more mathematical definitions given in the text. f. Looking at your final graph, do you think that this approach fully explains the types of relationships that might exist between \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3} ?\)

Donald, a frugal graduate student, consumes only coffee ( \(c\) ) and buttered toast (bt). He buys these items at the university cafeteria and always uses two pats of butter for each piece of toast. Donald spends exactly half of his meager stipend on coffee and the other half on buttered toast. a. In this problem, buttered toast can be treated as a composite commodity. What is its price in terms of the prices of butter \(\left(p_{b}\right)\) and toast \(\left(p_{t}\right) ?\) b. Explain why \(\partial c / \partial p_{b t}=0\). c. Is it also true here that \(\partial c / \partial p_{b}\) and \(\partial c / \partial p_{t}\) are equal to \(0 ?\)

Suppose that an individual consumes three goods, \(x_{1}, x_{2},\) and \(x_{3},\) and that \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\) are similar commodities (i.e., cheap and expensive restaurant meals) with \(p_{2}=k p_{3},\) where \(k < 1-\) that is, the goods' prices have a constant relationship to one another. a. Show that \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\) can be treated as a composite commodity. b. Suppose both \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\) are subject to a transaction cost of \(t\) per unit (for some examples, see Problem 6.6 ). How will this transaction cost affect the price of \(x_{2}\) relative to that of \(x_{3}\) ? How will this effect vary with the value of \(t\) ? c. Can you predict how an income-compensated increase in \(t\) will affect expenditures on the composite commodity \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3} ?\) Does the composite commodity theorem strictly apply to this case? d. How will an income-compensated increase in \(t\) affect how total spending on the composite commodity is allocated between \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3} ?\)

In general, uncompensated cross-price effects are not equal. That is, \\[\frac{\partial x_{i}}{\partial p_{j}} \neq \frac{\partial x_{j}}{\partial p_{i}}.\\] regardless of relative prices. (This is a generalization of Problem \(6.1 .)\)

Hard Times Burt buys only rotgut whiskey and jelly donuts to sustain him. For Burt, rotgut whiskey is an inferior good that exhibits Giffen's paradox, although rotgut whiskey and jelly donuts are Hicksian substitutes in the customary sense. Develop an intuitive explanation to suggest why an increase in the price of rotgut whiskey must cause fewer jelly donuts to be bought. That is, the goods must also be gross complements.

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