IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A tractable alternative to Cobb-Douglas utility for imperfect competition


  • Xiangkang Yin

    () (Department of Economics and Finance, La Trobe University)


This paper proposes a tractable alternative to Cobb-Douglas utility to resolve the problems of lack of reservation price and income effects in demand functions derived from Cobb-Douglas utility or quasilinear utility. Another advantage of this alternative is that it provides a closed-form general equilibrium in the case where some industries are monopoly while others are imperfectly competitive.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiangkang Yin, 2000. "A tractable alternative to Cobb-Douglas utility for imperfect competition," Working Papers 2000.10, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
  • Handle: RePEc:ltr:wpaper:2000.10

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2000.10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Christina M. L. Kelton & Robert P. Rebelein, 2007. "A General-Equilibrium Analysis of Public Policy for Pharmaceutical Prices," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 9(2), pages 285-318, April.
    2. Kris De Jaegher, 2008. "Benchmark Two-Good Utility Functions," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 76(1), pages 44-65, January.
    3. Clemens Fuest & Martin Kolmar, 2013. "Endogenous free riding and the decentralized user-fee financing of spillover goods in a n-region economy," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(2), pages 169-191, April.

    More about this item


    Utility Function; Reservation Price; Income Effect; Monopoly; Oligopoly EDIRC Provider-Institution: RePEc:edi:smlatau;

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • E21 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Consumption; Saving; Wealth


    Access and download statistics


    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:ltr:wpaper:2000.10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Stephen Scoglio). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.