IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-01552455.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The General Nesting Logit (GNL) Model using Aggregate Data

Author

Listed:
  • André de Palma

    (ENS Cachan - École normale supérieure - Cachan, Université Paris-Saclay)

  • Julien Monardo

    (ENS Cachan - École normale supérieure - Cachan, Université Paris-Saclay)

Abstract

We study the general nesting logit (GNL) model for differentiated products proposed by Fosgerau and de Palma (2016) as a member of the family of generalized entropies built by Fosgerau, Melo, de Palma and Shum (2017), to estimate demand when using aggregate data. We show that the GNL model allows products to be independent, substitutable, or complementary. While Fosgerau and de Palma (2016) show that it can be transformed into a linear regression, we show that this linear regression is very similar to that of Berry (1994) for the nested logit in that it is just a regression of market shares on product characteristics and terms related to its nesting structure. We then use the Dominick's database for estimating the demand for cereals in Chicago in 1991-1992.

Suggested Citation

  • André de Palma & Julien Monardo, 2017. "The General Nesting Logit (GNL) Model using Aggregate Data," Working Papers hal-01552455, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-01552455
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01552455v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01552455v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Randy Brenkers & Frank Verboven, 2006. "Liberalizing A Distribution System: The European Car Market," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(1), pages 216-251, March.
    2. Sergio Meza & K. Sudhir, 2010. "Do private labels increase retailer bargaining power?," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 333-363, September.
    3. Filip Matêjka & Alisdair McKay, 2015. "Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 272-298, January.
    4. Sanderson, Eleanor & Windmeijer, Frank, 2016. "A weak instrument F-test in linear IV models with multiple endogenous variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 190(2), pages 212-221.
    5. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    6. Mogens Fosgerau & André de Palma, 2016. "Generalized entropy models," Working Papers hal-01291347, HAL.
    7. Mattsson, Lars-Goran & Weibull, Jorgen W., 2002. "Probabilistic choice and procedurally bounded rationality," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 61-78, October.
    8. Matthew Gentzkow, 2007. "Valuing New Goods in a Model with Complementarity: Online Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 713-744, June.
    9. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    10. Armstrong, Mark, 2013. "A more general theory of commodity bundling," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 448-472.
    11. Drew Fudenberg & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2015. "Stochastic Choice and Revealed Perturbed Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 2371-2409, November.
    12. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    13. Fosgerau, Mogens & Melo, Emerson & Shum, Matt, 2017. "Discrete Choice and Rational Inattention: a General Equivalence Result�," MPRA Paper 76605, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Anderson, Simon Peter & de Palma, Andre & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1988. "A Representative Consumer Theory of the Logit Model," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 29(3), pages 461-466, August.
    15. Kenneth L. Judd & Ben Skrainka, 2011. "High performance quadrature rules: how numerical integration affects a popular model of product differentiation," CeMMAP working papers CWP03/11, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    16. Samuelson, Paul A, 1974. "Complementarity-An Essay on the 40th Anniversary of the Hicks-Allen Revolution in Demand Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1255-1289, December.
    17. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    18. Arthur Lewbel, 2001. "Demand Systems with and without Errors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 611-618, June.
    19. Josef Hofbauer & William H. Sandholm, 2002. "On the Global Convergence of Stochastic Fictitious Play," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2265-2294, November.
    20. McElroy, F W, 1969. "Returns to Scale, Euler's Theorem, and the Form of Production Functions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 37(2), pages 275-279, April.
    21. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    22. Frank Verboven, 1996. "International Price Discrimination in the European Car Market," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(2), pages 240-268, Summer.
    23. 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. Mogens Fosgerau & Julien Monardo & André de Palma, 2019. "The Inverse Product Differentiation Logit Model," Working Papers hal-02183411, HAL.
    2. Bokhari, Farasat A.S. & Mariuzzo, Franco, 2018. "Demand estimation and merger simulations for drugs: Logits v. AIDS," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 653-685.
    3. Roy Allen & John Rehbeck, 2020. "Identification of Random Coefficient Latent Utility Models," Papers 2003.00276, arXiv.org.
    4. Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2018. "Microeconometric Models of Consumer Demand," NBER Working Papers 25215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Iaria, Alessandro & ,, 2020. "Identification and Estimation of Demand for Bundles," CEPR Discussion Papers 14363, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    7. Yukihiro Kidokoro, 2015. "Discrete choice models for multicategory goods," GRIPS Discussion Papers 15-08, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    8. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    9. Kidokoro, Yukihiro, 2016. "A micro foundation for discrete choice models with multiple categories of goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 54-72.
    10. Mogens Fosgerau & Dennis Kristensen, 2021. "Identification of a class of index models: A topological approach," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(1), pages 121-133.
    11. Reynaert, Mathias & Verboven, Frank, 2014. "Improving the performance of random coefficients demand models: The role of optimal instruments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 179(1), pages 83-98.
    12. Steven Berry & Amit Gandhi & Philip Haile, 2013. "Connected Substitutes and Invertibility of Demand," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(5), pages 2087-2111, September.
    13. Wang, Ao, 2021. "A BLP Demand Model of Product-Level Market Shares with Complementarity," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1351, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    14. Duch-Brown, Néstor & Grzybowski, Lukasz & Romahn, André & Verboven, Frank, 2017. "The impact of online sales on consumers and firms. Evidence from consumer electronics," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 30-62.
    15. Mogens Fosgerau & Emerson Melo & André de Palma & Matthew Shum, 2020. "Discrete Choice And Rational Inattention: A General Equivalence Result," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1569-1589, November.
    16. Amit Gandhi & Jean-François Houde, 2019. "Measuring Substitution Patterns in Differentiated-Products Industries," NBER Working Papers 26375, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Julia González & M. Victoria Lacaze, 2012. "Preferences, Market Structure, and Welfare Evaluations in the Argentinean FFP Industry: A Case in Buenos Aires Province," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(3), pages 341-360, June.
    18. Roy Allen & John Rehbeck, 2020. "Hicksian complementarity and perturbed utility models," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 245-261, October.
    19. Alessandro Iaria, & Wang, Ao, 2021. "An Empirical Model of Quantity Discounts with Large Choice Sets," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1378, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    20. Alessandro Bonanno & Carlo Russo & Luisa Menapace, 2018. "Market power and bargaining in agrifood markets: A review of emerging topics and tools," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(1), pages 6-23, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Demand estimation; Differentiated products; Discrete choice; Generalized entropy; Representative consumer; C26; D11; D12; L;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C26 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation
    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:wpaper:hal-01552455. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.