IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/reveho/v16y2018i1d10.1007_s11150-017-9399-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Returns to scale in food preparation and the Deaton–Paxson puzzle

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas F. Crossley

    (University of Essex
    Institute for Fiscal Studies)

  • Yuqian Lu

    (Statistics Canada)

Abstract

We consider returns to scale in food preparation as a potential resolution of a puzzle raised by Deaton and Paxson (Journal of Political Economy, 106(5), 897–930, 1998). We clarify the conditions under which returns to scale in food preparation can resolve the puzzle. The key requirement is that foods are heterogeneous in time costs. We then show that detailed food expenditure and time use data are consistent with larger households shifting to more time intensive foods.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas F. Crossley & Yuqian Lu, 2018. "Returns to scale in food preparation and the Deaton–Paxson puzzle," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 5-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:reveho:v:16:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11150-017-9399-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11150-017-9399-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11150-017-9399-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11150-017-9399-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Browning & Pierre-André Chiappori & Arthur Lewbel, 2013. "Estimating Consumption Economies of Scale, Adult Equivalence Scales, and Household Bargaining Power," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 80(4), pages 1267-1303.
    2. John Gibson & Kathleen Beegle & Joachim De Weerdt & Jed Friedman, 2015. "What does Variation in Survey Design Reveal about the Nature of Measurement Errors in Household Consumption?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 77(3), pages 466-474, June.
    3. Rachel Griffith & Ephraim Leibtag & Andrew Leicester & Aviv Nevo, 2009. "Consumer Shopping Behavior: How Much Do Consumers Save?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(2), pages 99-120, Spring.
    4. George Davis, 2014. "Food at home production and consumption: implications for nutrition quality and policy," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 565-588, September.
    5. Angus Deaton, 2010. "Understanding the Mechanisms of Economic Development," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(3), pages 3-16, Summer.
    6. Li Gan & Victoria Vernon, 2003. "Testing the Barten Model of Economies of Scale in Household Consumption: Toward Resolving a Paradox of Deaton and Paxson," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(6), pages 1361-1377, December.
    7. Angus Deaton & Christina Paxson, 1998. "Economies of Scale, Household Size, and the Demand for Food," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(5), pages 897-930, October.
    8. Thomas F. Crossley & Yuqian Lu, 2004. "Exploring the Returns to Scale in Food Preparation (Baking Penny Buns at Home)," Social and Economic Dimensions of an Aging Population Research Papers 121, McMaster University.
    9. repec:pri:rpdevs:deaton_understanding_mechanisms_of_economic_development_with_abstract_apr is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Brzozowski, Matthew & Crossley, Thomas F. & Winter, Joachim K., 2017. "Does survey recall error explain the Deaton–Paxson puzzle?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 18-20.
    11. Davis, George C. & You, Wen, 2013. "Estimates of returns to scale, elasticity of substitution, and the thrifty food plan meal poverty rate from a direct household meal production function," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 204-212.
    12. John Gibson & Bonggeun Kim, 2018. "Economies of scale, bulk discounts, and liquidity constraints: comparing unit value and transaction level evidence in a poor country," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 21-39, March.
    13. Brugler, James, 2016. "Testing preference stability between couples and singles," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 15-17.
    14. Angus Deaton & Christina Paxson, 2003. "Engel's What? A Response to Gan and Vernon," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(6), pages 1378-1381, December.
    15. Awudu Abdulai, 2003. "Economies of Scale and the Demand for Food in Switzerland: Parametric and Non‐Parametric Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 247-267, July.
    16. John Gibson & Bonggeun Kim, 2007. "Measurement Error in Recall Surveys and the Relationship between Household Size and Food Demand," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(2), pages 473-489.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Echeverría, Lucía & Molina, José Alberto, 2022. "Exploring household heterogeneities of the Deaton-Paxson puzzle: Evidence for Argentina," Nülan. Deposited Documents 3622, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    2. Rachel Griffith & Wenchao (Michelle) Jin & Valérie Lechene, 2022. "The decline of home‐cooked food," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(2), pages 105-120, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Echeverría, Lucía & Molina, José Alberto, 2022. "Exploring household heterogeneities of the Deaton-Paxson puzzle: Evidence for Argentina," Nülan. Deposited Documents 3622, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    2. John Gibson & Bonggeun Kim, 2018. "Economies of scale, bulk discounts, and liquidity constraints: comparing unit value and transaction level evidence in a poor country," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 21-39, March.
    3. Perali, Federico, 2008. "The second Engel law: Is it a paradox?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(8), pages 1353-1377, November.
    4. Trevon D. Logan, 2011. "Economies Of Scale In The Household: Puzzles And Patterns From The American Past," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 49(4), pages 1008-1028, October.
    5. Timothy J. Halliday, 2010. "Mismeasured Household Size and its Implications for the Identification of Economies of Scale," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 72(2), pages 246-262, April.
    6. Jayasinghe, Maneka & Chai, Andreas & Ratnasiri, Shyama & Smith, Christine, 2017. "The power of the vegetable patch: How home-grown food helps large rural households achieve economies of scale & escape poverty," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 62-74.
    7. Gutierrez, Federico H., 2018. "A Sharing Model of the Household: Explaining the Deaton-Paxson Paradox and Computing Household Indifference Scales," GLO Discussion Paper Series 166, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    8. Karbasi, A. & Mohammadzadeh, S.H., 2018. "Estimating Household Expenditure Economies of Scale in Iran," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277152, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Brzozowski, Matthew & Crossley, Thomas F. & Winter, Joachim K., 2017. "Does survey recall error explain the Deaton–Paxson puzzle?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 18-20.
    10. Cristina Borra & Martin Browning & Almudena Sevilla, 2021. "Marriage and housework," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 73(2), pages 479-508.
    11. Nancy Folbre & Marta Murray-Close & Jooyeoun Suh, 2018. "Equivalence scales for extended income in the U.S," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 189-227, June.
    12. Devajyoti Deka, 2014. "The Living, Moving and Travel Behaviour of the Growing American Solo: Implications for Cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(4), pages 634-654, March.
    13. José Faro, 2013. "Cobb-Douglas preferences under uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(2), pages 273-285, October.
    14. Thomas F. Crossley & Yuqian Lu, 2004. "Exploring the Returns to Scale in Food Preparation (Baking Penny Buns at Home)," Social and Economic Dimensions of an Aging Population Research Papers 121, McMaster University.
    15. Alejandrina Salcedo & Todd Schoellman & Michèle Tertilt, 2012. "Families as roommates: Changes in U.S. household size from 1850 to 2000," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 3(1), pages 133-175, March.
    16. Jesper R.-V. Soerensen, 2020. "Testing a Class of Semi- or Nonparametric Conditional Moment Restriction Models using Series Methods," Discussion Papers 20-04, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    17. Berendeeva, Ekaterina & Ratnikova, Tatiana, 2016. "The Deaton–Paxson paradox in the consumption of Russian households," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 42, pages 54-74.
    18. Schneider, Kate R., 2022. "Nationally representative estimates of the cost of adequate diets, nutrient level drivers, and policy options for households in rural Malawi," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    19. Jacobson, David & Mavrikiou, Petroula M. & Minas, Christos, 2010. "Household size, income and expenditure on food: The case of Cyprus," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 319-328, April.
    20. Donald Vitaliano, 2015. "A note on the ‘food paradox’: some contradictory evidence," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 1043-1053, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Household returns to scale; Home production; Food preparation; Time use;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:reveho:v:16:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11150-017-9399-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.