Introduction
This primer aims to provide a concise and simple introduction to the theory of demand. As such it does not intend to be comprehensive but to provide enough background for the reader to progress rapidly to empirical work.
Notation
Bear in mind throughout that an agent need not be an individual but could be a household, or even when dealing with aggregation, the entire population. Also whenever a variable which is normally indexed (such as prices or quantities) is written without an index this indicates the vector of all of those variables.
- Set of goods indexed usually by $$i$$
- $$p_{i} =$$ Price of good $$i$$.
- $$q_{i} =$$ Quantity of good $$i$$ (usually the amount demanded or actually consumed).
- $$w =$$ total wealth of the agent
- $$y$$ income of the agent (often indexed by i to indicate period)
- $$T$$ will indicate time, often the total amount of hours available to an agent.
- $$g_{i}(w, p)$$ is the (Marshallian) demand function for good $$i$$
- $$u(q)$$ is the utility function. $$u$$ on its own will usually stand for a particular level of utility
- $$v(w,p) = max_{q} { u(q) : p \cdot q \leq w }$$ is the indirect utility function
- $$h_{i}(u,p)$$ is the Hicksian (compensated) demand function for good i. Known as compensated because they show how demand varies with utility held constant.
- $$e(u,p)$$ is the expenditure/cost function.
- The slutsky matrix S defined by $$s_{ij} = \partial h_{i}(u,p) / \partial p_{j}$$
- $$b_{i} = \frac{p_{i}q_{i}}{w}$$ is the budget share for good i
- $$e_{i}$$ is the wealth elasticity of demand for good k (at current prices and wealth) defined as: $$ e_{i} = \partial \log( g_{i}(w,p)) / \partial \log w $$
- $$e_{ij}$$ are the cross-price elasticities of demand (if $$i = j$$ then this is the own-price elasticity). Defined as: $$ e_{ij} = \partial \log( g_{i}(w,p)) / \partial \log p_{j} \] $$
The Basic Properties of Demand Functions
We shall assume a linear budget constraint.1 That is:2
$$ \[ w = \sum_{k} p_{k}q_{k} \] $$
Restrictions on the Demand Function: The Big Four
- Adding Up: From the budget constraint we have: $$ w = \sum_{k} p_{k}g_{k}(w,p) $$.
- Homogeneity The demand function is homogenous of degree 0 in prices and wealth (purely nominal changes should have no effect): $$ g_{i}(\lambda w, \lambda p) = g_{i}(w,p) $$.
- Slutsky Matrix is Symmetric.
-
Negative Semi-Definiteness of the Slutsky Matrix.
Remarks
Taking derivatives, adding up implies:
- Engel Aggregation: $$ \sum_{k} p_{k} \frac{\partial g_{k}(w,p)}{\partial w} = 1 $$
- Cournot Aggregation: $$ g_{i} + \sum_{k} p_{k} \frac{\partial g_{k}(w,p)}{\partial p_{i}} = 0, \forall i = 1, …. n $$
- Invertability (see Deaton and Muellbauer (1980) 48ff). Demand functions that satisfy the four properties above are integrable into a consistent preference ordering. That is we may construct a cost/utility function basis from which such demands can then be derived. Not only is this result important in itself but it demonstrates that these four properties are the only (necessary) consequences of utility maximization.
Other Useful Properties
Roy’s Identity: This allows us to relate the Marshallian demand functions to the indirect utility function:
$$ \[ \frac{\partial v / \partial p_{i}} {\partial v / \partial w } = g_{i}(u,p) \] $$
Slutsky equation:
$$ \[ s_{ij} = \frac{\partial h_{i}} {\partial p_{j}} = \frac{\partial g_{i}} {\partial p_{j}} + \frac{\partial g_{i}} {\partial w} g_{j} \] $$
Preference Foundations for Demand Functions
Omitted for time being. This is pretty dull. Refer people to Mas-Collel ea. …. Plan:
- Axioms
- Cardinal (value matter) and Ordinal (only order matters) preference theory
- The existence of a real-valued utility function
- WARP, GARP … ?
Deriving Demand Functions from Utility
Utility Maximization
Given a cardinal utility function $$u(q)$$ the consumer has the following utility maximization problem (UMP):
$$ \[ max_{q} u(q), \textrm{with } p.q \leq w, q \geq 0 \] $$
Let $$ q^{s} $$ be values that solve this problem (assuming they exist). Then the demand function is defined by $$g(w,p) = q^{s}$$
The Dual: Cost Minimization
There exists a problem dual to the original utility maximization problem, namely the expenditure minimization problem (EMP).
$$ \[ min_{q} w = p . q, \textrm{subject to } u(q) = u \] $$
Properties of the Cost Function
- The cost function is homogenous of degree 1 in prices, i.e. $$ c(u,\lambda p) = \lambda c(u,p) $$
- The cost function is increasing in $$u$$, nondecreasing in $$p$$
- $$c(u,p)$$ is concave in prices
- The cost function is continuous in $$p$$ and its first and second derivatives with respect to prices exist everywhere (except possibly on a set of meausure 0)
- (Shepherd’s Lemma) Partial derivatives of the cost function with respect to price yield the Hicksian demands: $$ \frac{\partial c(u,p)} {\partial p_{i} } = h_{i}(u,p) $$
Summary
[[TODO: insert summary diagram]]
Aggregation
[[TODO]]
Footnotes
- Though used by almost all textbooks as a starting point this is not necessarily as innocent as it may seem. See Deaton and Muellbauer, Chapter 1, for more discussion of this issue.↩
- In order to have equality, i.e. for the constraint to bind, this does also assume the consumer is locally non-satiated. This restriction is known as Walras’ Law.↩
One Response to Demand Theory: A Primer
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
-
Categories
- *nix
- Academic
- Activity Updates
- Books
- Cinema
- Code
- Command Line
- Copyright
- Culture and Society
- Data Digging
- Economics
- EUPD
- External
- Filesharing
- Governance
- Hacks
- Happiness
- Hardware
- History
- Innovation and Intellectual Property
- Intellectual Myths
- Javascript
- Knowledge Systems
- Miscellaneous
- Musings
- Notes
- Open Bibliographic Data
- Open Data
- Open Knowledge Foundation
- Openness
- Own Work
- Papers
- People
- Photos
- Platforms
- Poetry
- Policy
- PSI
- Python
- Quote
- RDF
- Shuttleworth Fellow
- Software
- Sysadmin
- Talks
- Transaction Costs
- Work In Progress
-
Articles
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- March 2004
- October 2003
-
Meta

Was looking for info on that. I wrote it off as yet another cost, but I’m going to look at it once more.