IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/empeco/v52y2017i1d10.1007_s00181-016-1082-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A generalization to QUAIDS

Author

Listed:
  • Arman Bidarbakht Nia

    (United Nations)

Abstract

Previous research shows that consumers’ response to price and income changes is heterogeneous. In addition, evidence from national data often does not support the classical assumption of one commodity-one price. This paper introduces a data coherent generalization to the quadratic form of the almost ideal demand system (g-QUAIDS) that incorporates the sources of heterogeneity in the demand function and allows for regional price variation. Aggregation over consumers imposes a linearization to the g-QUAIDS that requires a new set of price indices. The results from an empirical study by using microdata from the Household Income and Expenditure Survey of Iran highlight the impact of aggregation bias in relation to the level of aggregation. An investigation of the predictive power of linear versus nonlinear g-QUAIDS in different aggregation levels provides practical recommendations for consumer demand analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Arman Bidarbakht Nia, 2017. "A generalization to QUAIDS," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 393-410, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:52:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s00181-016-1082-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s00181-016-1082-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00181-016-1082-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00181-016-1082-8?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. Hoderlein, Stefan, 2011. "How many consumers are rational?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 164(2), pages 294-309, October.
    2. Slesnick, Daniel T., 2005. "Prices and demand: New evidence from micro data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 269-274, December.
    3. Toshinobu Matsuda, 2006. "Linear approximations to the quadratic almost ideal demand system," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 663-675, September.
    4. McKelvey, Christopher, 2011. "Price, unit value, and quality demanded," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 157-169, July.
    5. Muellbauer, John, 1976. "Community Preferences and the Representative Consumer," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(5), pages 979-999, September.
    6. Blundell, Richard & Kristensen, Dennis & Matzkin, Rosa, 2014. "Bounding quantile demand functions using revealed preference inequalities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 179(2), pages 112-127.
    7. Dette, Holger & Hoderlein, Stefan & Neumeyer, Natalie, 2016. "Testing multivariate economic restrictions using quantiles: The example of Slutsky negative semidefiniteness," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 191(1), pages 129-144.
    8. Denton, Frank T. & Mountain, Dean C., 2001. "Income distribution and aggregation/disaggregation biases in the measurement of consumer demand elasticities," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 21-28, October.
    9. Stefan Hoderlein & Jörg Stoye, 2014. "Revealed Preferences in a Heterogeneous Population," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(2), pages 197-213, May.
    10. James Banks & Richard Blundell & Arthur Lewbel, 1997. "Quadratic Engel Curves And Consumer Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 527-539, November.
    11. Giancarlo Moschini, 1995. "Units of Measurement and the Stone Index in Demand System Estimation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(1), pages 63-68.
    12. Jorgenson, Dale W & Lau, Lawrence J & Stoker, Thomas M, 1980. "Welfare Comparison under Exact Aggregation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 268-272, May.
    13. Blundell, Richard & Pashardes, Panos & Weber, Guglielmo, 1993. "What Do We Learn About Consumer Demand Patterns from Micro Data?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(3), pages 570-597, June.
    14. Hoderlein, Stefan & Mihaleva, Sonya, 2008. "Increasing the price variation in a repeated cross section," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 316-325, December.
    15. Alston, Julian M. & Chalfant, James A. & Piggott, Nicholas E., 2001. "Incorporating demand shifters in the Almost Ideal demand system," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 73-78, January.
    16. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-326, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hoderlein, Stefan & Holzmann, Hajo & Meister, Alexander, 2017. "The triangular model with random coefficients," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 201(1), pages 144-169.
    2. Witterblad, Mikael, 2008. "Essays on Redistribution and Local Public Expenditures," Umeå Economic Studies 731, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    3. Witterblad, Mikael, 2008. "The Demand for Local Public Services in Sweden," Umeå Economic Studies 730, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    4. Hubner, Stefan, 2016. "Topics in nonparametric identification and estimation," Other publications TiSEM 08fce56b-3193-46e0-871b-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Denton, Frank T. & Mountain, Dean C., 2011. "Exploring the effects of aggregation error in the estimation of consumer demand elasticities," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 1747-1755, July.
    6. Sam Cosaert & Thomas Demuynck, 2018. "Nonparametric Welfare and Demand Analysis with Unobserved Individual Heterogeneity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(2), pages 349-361, May.
    7. Frank T. Denton & Dean C. Mountain, 2007. "Exploring the Effects of Aggregation Error in the Estimation of Consumer Demand Elasticities," Social and Economic Dimensions of an Aging Population Research Papers 226, McMaster University.
    8. Frank Denton & Dean Mountain, 2004. "Aggregation effects on price and expenditure elasticities in a quadratic almost ideal demand system," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(3), pages 613-628, August.
    9. Hoderlein, Stefan & Su, Liangjun & White, Halbert & Yang, Thomas Tao, 2016. "Testing for monotonicity in unobservables under unconfoundedness," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 183-202.
    10. Frank T. Denton & Dean C. Mountain, 2016. "Biases in consumer elasticities based on micro and aggregate data: an integrated framework and empirical evaluation," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 531-560, March.
    11. Paula Carvalho Pereda & Denisard Cneio de Oliveira Alves, 2008. "Demand for Nutrients in Brazil," Anais do XXXVI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 36th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 200807211136590, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    12. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2018. "Nonparametric Analysis of Random Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(6), pages 1883-1909, November.
    13. Frank Denton & Dean Mountain, 2014. "The implications of mean scaling for the calculation of aggregate consumer elasticities," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 12(3), pages 297-314, September.
    14. William Barnett & Ousmane Seck, 2006. "Rotterdam vs Almost Ideal Models: Will the Best Demand Specification Please Stand Up?," WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS 200605, University of Kansas, Department of Economics.
    15. Bopape, Lesiba, 2006. "Heterogeneity of Household Food Expenditure Patterns in South Africa," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21300, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Frank T. Denton & Dean C. Mountain, 2011. "Aggregation and Other Biases in the Calculation of Consumer Elasticities for Models of Arbitrary Rank," Quantitative Studies in Economics and Population Research Reports 447, McMaster University.
    17. Denni Tommasi, 2016. "Household Responses to cash Transfers," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2016-20, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    18. Dette, Holger & Hoderlein, Stefan & Neumeyer, Natalie, 2016. "Testing multivariate economic restrictions using quantiles: The example of Slutsky negative semidefiniteness," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 191(1), pages 129-144.
    19. Cherchye, Laurens & Demuynck, Thomas & Rock, Bram De, 2019. "Bounding counterfactual demand with unobserved heterogeneity and endogenous expenditures," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 483-506.
    20. Gallet, Craig A., 2010. "The income elasticity of meat: a meta-analysis," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(4), pages 1-14.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Aggregation bias; Consumer demand system; Price index;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • C43 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Index Numbers and Aggregation
    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General

    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:spr:empeco:v:52:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s00181-016-1082-8. 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.