IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v24y2000i2p177-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Neglected Controversy in the Modelling of Consumers' Expenditure

Author

Listed:
  • Cook, Steven

Abstract

In 1989 and 1992, Thomas noted the divergence of the "stylised history" of the consumption function from the true sequence of events in its early history. To the list of overlooked elements can now be added the debate on the cyclical nature of consumption considered here. Analysis of the data used in the original studies shows a simplistic model considered at the time to be the "best" available. This contrasts sharply with Spanos (1989), who was critical of the methods of the initial consumption researchers. However, use of recursive estimation shows concerns over a varying marginal propensity to consume to be unwarranted. Copyright 2000 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Cook, Steven, 2000. "A Neglected Controversy in the Modelling of Consumers' Expenditure," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 24(2), pages 177-191, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:24:y:2000:i:2:p:177-91
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cook, Steven & Fosten, Jack, 2019. "Replicating rockets and feathers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 139-151.

    More about this item

    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:oup:cambje:v:24:y:2000:i:2:p:177-91. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.