IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/26424.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Demand Analysis with Many Prices

Author

Listed:
  • Victor Chernozhukov
  • Jerry A. Hausman
  • Whitney K. Newey

Abstract

From its inception, demand estimation has faced the problem of "many prices." This paper provides estimators of average demand and associated bounds on exact consumer surplus when there are many prices in cross-section or panel data. For cross-section data we provide a debiased machine learner of consumer surplus bounds that allows for general heterogeneity and solves the "zeros problem" of demand. For panel data we provide bias corrected, ridge regularized estimators of average coefficients and consumer surplus bounds. In scanner data we find smaller panel elasticities than cross-section and that soda price increases are regressive.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor Chernozhukov & Jerry A. Hausman & Whitney K. Newey, 2019. "Demand Analysis with Many Prices," NBER Working Papers 26424, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:26424
    Note: IO LS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w26424.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chernozhukov, Victor & Fernández-Val, Iván & Newey, Whitney K., 2019. "Nonseparable multinomial choice models in cross-section and panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 104-116.
    2. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2018. "Nonparametric Analysis of Random Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(6), pages 1883-1909, November.
    3. Pierre Dubois & Rachel Griffith & Martin O'Connell, 2020. "How Well Targeted Are Soda Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(11), pages 3661-3704, November.
    4. Guido W. Imbens & Whitney K. Newey, 2009. "Identification and Estimation of Triangular Simultaneous Equations Models Without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1481-1512, September.
    5. Arthur Lewbel, 2001. "Demand Systems with and without Errors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 611-618, June.
    6. Pesaran, M. Hashem & Smith, Ron, 1995. "Estimating long-run relationships from dynamic heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 79-113, July.
    7. Jerry A. Hausman & Whitney K. Newey, 2016. "Individual Heterogeneity and Average Welfare," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 1225-1248, May.
    8. Soren Blomquist & Anil Kumar & Che-Yuan Liang & Whitney K. Newey, 2014. "Individual heterogeneity, nonlinear budget sets, and taxable income," CeMMAP working papers CWP21/14, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    9. Mathias Dewatripont & Lars Peter Hansen & Stephen Turnovsky, 2003. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications, Eighth World Congress," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/176003, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    10. Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A., 1986. "Errors in variables in panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 93-118, February.
    11. Jerry Hausman & Ephraim Leibtag, 2007. "Consumer benefits from increased competition in shopping outlets: Measuring the effect of Wal-Mart," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(7), pages 1157-1177.
    12. A. Belloni & D. Chen & V. Chernozhukov & C. Hansen, 2012. "Sparse Models and Methods for Optimal Instruments With an Application to Eminent Domain," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(6), pages 2369-2429, November.
    13. Harding, Matthew & Lovenheim, Michael, 2017. "The effect of prices on nutrition: Comparing the impact of product- and nutrient-specific taxes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 53-71.
    14. Hoderlein, Stefan & Lewbel, Arthur, 2012. "Regressor Dimension Reduction With Economic Constraints: The Example Of Demand Systems With Many Goods," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(5), pages 1087-1120, October.
    15. Richard Blundell & Jean-Marc Robin, 2000. "Latent Separability: Grouping Goods without Weak Separability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 53-84, January.
    16. Chamberlain, Gary, 1982. "Multivariate regression models for panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 5-46, January.
    17. Burda, Martin & Harding, Matthew & Hausman, Jerry, 2012. "A Poisson mixture model of discrete choice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(2), pages 184-203.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Newey, Whitney K, 1994. "The Asymptotic Variance of Semiparametric Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1349-1382, November.
    21. Richard Blundell & Alan Duncan & Krishna Pendakur, 1998. "Semiparametric estimation and consumer demand," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 435-461.
    22. Bryan S. Graham & James L. Powell, 2012. "Identification and Estimation of Average Partial Effects in “Irregular” Correlated Random Coefficient Panel Data Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(5), pages 2105-2152, September.
    23. Deaton,Angus & Muellbauer,John, 1980. "Economics and Consumer Behavior," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521296762.
    24. Victor Chernozhukov & Whitney K. Newey & James Robins, 2018. "Double/de-biased machine learning using regularized Riesz representers," CeMMAP working papers CWP15/18, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    25. 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.
    26. Burtless, Gary & Hausman, Jerry A, 1978. "The Effect of Taxation on Labor Supply: Evaluating the Gary Negative Income Tax Experiments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(6), pages 1103-1130, December.
    27. Burda, Martin & Harding, Matthew & Hausman, Jerry, 2008. "A Bayesian mixed logit-probit model for multinomial choice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 232-246, December.
    28. Soren Blomquist & Whitney Newey, 2002. "Nonparametric Estimation with Nonlinear Budget Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2455-2480, November.
    29. Blomquist, Sören & Newey, Whitney, 1997. "Nonparametric Estimation of Labor Supply Functions Generated by Piece Wise Linear Budget Constraints," Working Paper Series 1997:24, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    30. Richard Blundell & Rosa L. Matzkin, 2014. "Control functions in nonseparable simultaneous equations models," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5, pages 271-295, July.
    31. Daniel McFadden, 2005. "Revealed stochastic preference: a synthesis," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(2), pages 245-264, August.
    32. Hausman, Jerry A, 1981. "Exact Consumer's Surplus and Deadweight Loss," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 662-676, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kyle Colangelo & Ying-Ying Lee, 2020. "Double Debiased Machine Learning Nonparametric Inference with Continuous Treatments," Papers 2004.03036, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2022.
    2. Kyle Colangelo & Ying-Ying Lee, 2019. "Double debiased machine learning nonparametric inference with continuous treatments," CeMMAP working papers CWP72/19, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    3. Pierre Dubois & Rachel Griffith & Martin O'Connell, 2020. "How Well Targeted Are Soda Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(11), pages 3661-3704, November.
    4. Victor Chernozhukov & Whitney K. Newey & Victor Quintas-Martinez & Vasilis Syrgkanis, 2021. "Automatic Debiased Machine Learning via Neural Nets for Generalized Linear Regression," Papers 2104.14737, arXiv.org.
    5. Andrii Babii & Ryan T. Ball & Eric Ghysels & Jonas Striaukas, 2020. "Machine Learning Panel Data Regressions with Heavy-tailed Dependent Data: Theory and Application," Papers 2008.03600, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2021.
    6. Martin O'Connell & Kate Smith, 2021. "Optimal sin taxation and market power," IFS Working Papers W21/30, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    7. Ming Li, 2021. "A Time-Varying Endogenous Random Coefficient Model with an Application to Production Functions," Papers 2110.00982, arXiv.org.

    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. Jerry A. Hausman & Whitney K. Newey, 2016. "Individual Heterogeneity and Average Welfare," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 1225-1248, May.
    2. 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.
    3. Arthur Lewbel & Krishna Pendakur, 2017. "Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity in Demand Using Generalized Random Coefficients," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1100-1148.
    4. 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.
    5. Debopam Bhattacharya, 2021. "The Empirical Content of Binary Choice Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 457-474, January.
    6. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2018. "Nonparametric Analysis of Random Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(6), pages 1883-1909, November.
    7. Richard Blundell & Dennis Kristensen & Rosa Matzkin, 2017. "Individual counterfactuals with multidimensional unobserved heterogeneity," CeMMAP working papers CWP60/17, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    8. 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.
    9. Hoderlein, Stefan & Holzmann, Hajo & Meister, Alexander, 2017. "The triangular model with random coefficients," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 201(1), pages 144-169.
    10. Chernozhukov, Victor & Fernández-Val, Iván & Newey, Whitney K., 2019. "Nonseparable multinomial choice models in cross-section and panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 104-116.
    11. Hubner, Stefan, 2016. "Topics in nonparametric identification and estimation," Other publications TiSEM 08fce56b-3193-46e0-871b-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Blomquist, Sören & Simula, Laurent, 2019. "Marginal deadweight loss when the income tax is nonlinear," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 47-60.
    13. Blomquist, Sören & Kumar, Anil & Liang, Che-Yuan & Newey, Whitney K., 2014. "Individual Heterogeneity, Nonlinear Budget Sets, and Taxable Income," Working Paper Series, Center for Fiscal Studies 2014:1, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    14. Thomas Demuynck, 2018. "Testing the homogeneous marginal utility of income assumption," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(10), pages 1120-1136, November.
    15. Demuynck, T., 2015. "The homogeneous marginal utility of income assumption," Research Memorandum 013, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    16. Stefan Hoderlein & Jörg Stoye, 2015. "Testing stochastic rationality and predicting stochastic demand: the case of two goods," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 313-328, October.
    17. Victor Chernozhukov & Whitney K. Newey & Rahul Singh, 2022. "Automatic Debiased Machine Learning of Causal and Structural Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(3), pages 967-1027, May.
    18. Yuichi Kitamura & Jorg Stoye, 2013. "Nonparametric Analysis of Random Utility Models: Testing," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1902, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    19. Gan, Li & Ju, Gaosheng & Zhu, Xi, 2015. "Nonparametric estimation of structural labor supply and exact welfare change under nonconvex piecewise-linear budget sets," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(2), pages 526-544.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • C55 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Large Data Sets: Modeling and Analysis
    • 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:nbr:nberwo:26424. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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: (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.