IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/27437.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Parallel Inverse Aggregate Demand Curves in Discrete Choice Models

Author

Listed:
  • Kory Kroft
  • René Leal Vizcaíno
  • Matthew J. Notowidigdo
  • Ting Wang

Abstract

This paper highlights a previously-unnoticed property of commonly-used discrete choice models, which is that they feature parallel demand curves. Specifically, we show that in random utility models, inverse aggregate demand curves shift in parallel with respect to variety if and only if the random utility shocks follow the Gumbel distribution. Using results from Extreme Value Theory, we provide conditions for other distributions to generate parallel demands asymptotically, as the number of varieties increase. We establish these results in the benchmark case of symmetric products, illustrate them using numerical simulations and show that they hold in extended versions of the model with correlated tastes and asymmetric products. Lastly, we provide a “proof of concept” of parallel demands as an economic tool by showing how to use parallel demands to identify the change in consumer surplus from an exogenous change in product variety.

Suggested Citation

  • Kory Kroft & René Leal Vizcaíno & Matthew J. Notowidigdo & Ting Wang, 2020. "Parallel Inverse Aggregate Demand Curves in Discrete Choice Models," NBER Working Papers 27437, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:27437
    Note: IO LS PE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w27437.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Spence, 1976. "Product Selection, Fixed Costs, and Monopolistic Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 43(2), pages 217-235.
    2. Gabaix, Xavier & Laibson, David & Li, Deyuan & Li, Hongyi & Resnick, Sidney & de Vries, Casper G., 2016. "The impact of competition on prices with numerous firms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-24.
    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. Feenstra, Robert C, 1994. "New Product Varieties and the Measurement of International Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 157-177, March.
    5. Aviv Nevo, 2011. "Empirical Models of Consumer Behavior," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 51-75, September.
    6. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    7. David Card & Ana Rute Cardoso & Joerg Heining & Patrick Kline, 2018. "Firms and Labor Market Inequality: Evidence and Some Theory," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(S1), pages 13-70.
    8. Christian Broda & David E. Weinstein, 2006. "Globalization and the Gains From Variety," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(2), pages 541-585.
    9. Patrick Bayer & Fernando Ferreira & Robert McMillan, 2007. "A Unified Framework for Measuring Preferences for Schools and Neighborhoods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(4), pages 588-638, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Costas Arkolakis & Svetlana Demidova & Peter J. Klenow & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, 2008. "Endogenous Variety and the Gains from Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 444-450, May.
    12. Yves Breitmoser, 2021. "An axiomatic foundation of conditional logit," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(1), pages 245-261, July.
    13. Cardell, N. Scott, 1997. "Variance Components Structures for the Extreme-Value and Logistic Distributions with Application to Models of Heterogeneity," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 185-213, April.
    14. Romer, Paul, 1994. "New goods, old theory, and the welfare costs of trade restrictions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 5-38, February.
    15. Swati Dhingra & John Morrow, 2019. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity under Firm Heterogeneity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(1), pages 196-232.
    16. Michael Dinerstein & Troy D. Smith, 2021. "Quantifying the Supply Response of Private Schools to Public Policies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(10), pages 3376-3417, October.
    17. Spence, Michael, 1976. "Product Differentiation and Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 407-414, May.
    18. Steven T. Berry & Joel Waldfogel, 1999. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency in Radio Broadcasting," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(3), pages 397-420, Autumn.
    19. Anderson, Simon P. & De Palma, Andre & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1987. "The CES is a discrete choice model?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 139-140.
    20. N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring.
    21. Chang‐Tai Hsieh & Erik Hurst & Charles I. Jones & Peter J. Klenow, 2019. "The Allocation of Talent and U.S. Economic Growth," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(5), pages 1439-1474, September.
    22. Anderson, Simon P & De Palma, Andre, 1992. "The Logit as a Model of Product Differentiation," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(1), pages 51-67, January.
    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. Thomas W. Quan & Kevin R. Williams, 2017. "Product Variety, Across-Market Demand Heterogeneity, and the Value of Online Retail," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2054R3, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jun 2018.
    2. Lukas Mohler, 2011. "Variety Gains from Trade in Switzerland," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 147(I), pages 45-70, March.
    3. Joonhwi Joo & Ali Hortacsu, 2016. "Semiparametric estimation of CES demand system with observed and unobserved product characteristics," 2016 Meeting Papers 36, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    4. Shon M. Ferguson, 2015. "Endogenous Product Differentiation, Market Size and Prices," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 45-61, February.
    5. Steven Berry & Alon Eizenberg & Joel Waldfogel, 2016. "Optimal product variety in radio markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(3), pages 463-497, August.
    6. Thomas W. Quan & Kevin R. Williams, 2016. "Product Variety, Across-Market Demand Heterogeneity, and the Value of Online Retail," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2054, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    7. Irac, D., 2008. "Access to new imported varieties and total factor productivity: Firm level evidence from France," Working papers 204, Banque de France.
    8. Amit Khandelwal, 2010. "The Long and Short (of) Quality Ladders," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(4), pages 1450-1476.
    9. Alexander Tarasov & Robertas Zubrickas, 2023. "Optimal income taxation under monopolistic competition," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(2), pages 495-523, August.
    10. Yuk Ying Chang & Martin Young, 2015. "Dissipative Competition: Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 15(2), pages 169-198, June.
    11. Heiland, Inga & Kohler, Wilhelm, 2022. "Heterogeneous workers, trade, and migration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    12. Lukas Mohler & Michael Seitz, 2012. "The gains from variety in the European Union," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 148(3), pages 475-500, September.
    13. Xuepeng Liu & Mary E. Lovel & Jan Ondrich, 2017. "Does Final Market Demand Elasticity Influence the Location of Export Processing? Evidence from Multinational Decisions in China," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Mary E Lovely (ed.), International Economic Integration and Domestic Performance, chapter 12, pages 199-226, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    14. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    15. Frank R. Lichtenberg & Joel Waldfogel, 2003. "Does Misery Love Company? Evidence from pharmaceutical markets before and after the Orphan Drug Act," NBER Working Papers 9750, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Steven Berry & Alon Eizenberg & Joel Waldfogel, 2016. "Fixed Costs and the Product Market Treatment of Preference Minorities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 466-493, September.
    17. Kang, Kichun, 2009. "The export price index with the effect of variety and an empirical analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 385-391, March.
    18. Gouel, Christophe & Jean, Sébastien, 2023. "Love of variety and gains from trade," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    19. Chang-Tai Hsieh & Enrico Moretti, 2003. "Can Free Entry Be Inefficient? Fixed Commissions and Social Waste in the Real Estate Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(5), pages 1076-1122, October.
    20. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and monopolistic competition," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(4), pages 645-649.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • L0 - Industrial Organization - - General

    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:27437. 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: the person in charge (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. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.