IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nuf/econwp/1906.html

Nonparametric Analysis of Labour Supply Using Random Fields

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Crawford

    (Nuffield College, University of Oxford)

Abstract

This paper studies labour supply in panel data by means of random fields. In doing so it describes a way of uniting classical revealed preference techniques and econometric prediction by means of a best linear, unbiased prediction procedure based on Goldberger (1962) and known as Weiner-Kolmogorov prediction or Universal Kriging in the spatial statistics literature. This, it is argued, retains the best features of both revealed preference and statistical approaches. In an application to the consumption and labour supply decisions of NYC taxi drivers this paper makes a number of empirical points: first that behaviour which is, on the basis of conventional revealed preference-based measures, rational, can be shown to be highly economically implausible; secondly that modelling labour supply using parsimonious relevant conditioning can solve the puzzle by providing predictions which match the data, are theoretically-consistent yet are behaviourally and economically sensible; thirdly it shows that modelling behaviour at the level at the which the theory is designed to apply (which is to say at the level of the individual) can given greater insights into behaviour and heterogeneity than modelling population moments or quantiles; lastly than the practice of assuming monotonic scalar heterogeneity when modelling cross sectional data may give a strongly misleading impression of both behaviour and preference heterogeneity.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Crawford, 2019. "Nonparametric Analysis of Labour Supply Using Random Fields," Economics Papers 2019-W06, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  • Handle: RePEc:nuf:econwp:1906
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/economics/Papers/2019/2019W06_RandomFields.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Syngjoo Choi & Shachar Kariv & Wieland M?ller & Dan Silverman, 2014. "Who Is (More) Rational?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(6), pages 1518-1550, June.
    2. Colin Camerer & Linda Babcock & George Loewenstein & Richard Thaler, 1997. "Labor Supply of New York City Cabdrivers: One Day at a Time," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 407-441.
    3. Richard Blundell & Joel Horowitz & Matthias Parey, 2017. "Nonparametric Estimation of a Nonseparable Demand Function under the Slutsky Inequality Restriction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(2), pages 291-304, May.
    4. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2018. "Nonparametric Analysis of Random Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(6), pages 1883-1909, November.
    5. Henry S. Farber, 2008. "Reference-Dependent Preferences and Labor Supply: The Case of New York City Taxi Drivers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 1069-1082, June.
    6. Timothy K. M. Beatty & Ian A. Crawford, 2011. "How Demanding Is the Revealed Preference Approach to Demand?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2782-2795, October.
    7. Hausman, Jerry A & Newey, Whitney K, 1995. "Nonparametric Estimation of Exact Consumers Surplus and Deadweight Loss," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(6), pages 1445-1476, November.
    8. Brown, Bryan W & Walker, Mary Beth, 1989. "The Random Utility Hypothesis and Inference in Demand Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(4), pages 815-829, July.
    9. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    10. Henry S. Farber, 2005. "Is Tomorrow Another Day? The Labor Supply of New York City Cabdrivers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(1), pages 46-82, February.
    11. Vincent P. Crawford & Juanjuan Meng, 2011. "New York City Cab Drivers' Labor Supply Revisited: Reference-Dependent Preferences with Rational-Expectations Targets for Hours and Income," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(5), pages 1912-1932, August.
    12. W. E. Diewert, 1973. "Afriat and Revealed Preference Theory," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 40(3), pages 419-425.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Vartia, Yrjo O, 1983. "Efficient Methods of Measuring Welfare Change and Compensated Income in Terms of Ordinary Demand Functions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(1), pages 79-98, January.
    16. Varian, Hal R., 1985. "Non-parametric analysis of optimizing behavior with measurement error," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 445-458.
    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. Charles Gauthier & Sebastiaan Maes & Raghav Malhotra, 2023. "Consumer Welfare Under Individual Heterogeneity," Papers 2303.01231, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2025.
    2. Maes, Sebastiaan & Malhotra, Raghav, 2024. "Robust Hicksian Welfare Analysis under Individual Heterogeneity," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 84, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.

    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. Cosaert, Sam & Lefebvre, Mathieu & Martin, Ludivine, 2022. "Are preferences for work reference dependent or time nonseparable? New experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    2. Martin, Vincent, 2017. "When to quit: Narrow bracketing and reference dependence in taxi drivers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 166-187.
    3. Liang Choon Wang, 2016. "The effect of high-stakes testing on suicidal ideation of teenagers with reference-dependent preferences," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(2), pages 345-364, April.
    4. Hai Long Duong & Junhong Chu & Dai Yao, 2023. "Taxi Drivers’ Response to Cancellations and No-Shows: New Evidence for Reference-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 179-199, January.
    5. Chang, Tom & Gross, Tal, 2014. "How many pears would a pear packer pack if a pear packer could pack pears at quasi-exogenously varying piece rates?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 1-17.
    6. Eil, David & Lien, Jaimie W., 2014. "Staying ahead and getting even: Risk attitudes of experienced poker players," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 50-69.
    7. Hsiaw, Alice, 2013. "Goal-setting and self-control," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 601-626.
    8. Cadsby, C. Bram & Song, Fei & Zubanov, Nick, 2024. "Working more for more and working more for less: Labor supply in the gain and loss domains," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Jonathan de Quidt, 2018. "Your Loss Is My Gain: A Recruitment Experiment with Framed Incentives," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 522-559.
    10. Hlouskova, Jaroslava & Tsigaris, Panagiotis, 2020. "A behavioral economic approach to multiple job holdings with leisure," IHS Working Paper Series 23, Institute for Advanced Studies.
    11. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.
    12. Alessandro Saia, 2022. "Trouble Underground: Demand Shocks and the Labor Supply Behavior of New York City Taxi Drivers," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, March.
    13. Christian Grund & Johannes Martin, 2017. "Monetary Reference Points of Managers – Empirical Evidence of Status Quo Preferences and Social Comparisons," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 64(1), pages 70-87, February.
    14. Sanae Tashiro & Stephen Choi, 2021. "Labor market outcomes under digital platform business models in the sharing economy: the case of the taxi services industry," Business Economics, Palgrave Macmillan;National Association for Business Economics, vol. 56(4), pages 240-251, October.
    15. de Quidt, Jonathan, 2014. "Your loss is my gain: a recruitment experiment with framed incentives," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 58208, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Zubrickas, Robertas, 2023. "The relative income effect and labor supply," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 176-184.
    17. Koch, Alexander K. & Nafziger, Julia, 2011. "Goals and Psychological Accounting," IZA Discussion Papers 5802, IZA Network @ LISER.
    18. Smeulders, Bart & Crama, Yves & Spieksma, Frits C.R., 2019. "Revealed preference theory: An algorithmic outlook," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(3), pages 803-815.
    19. Pascaline Dupas & Jonathan Robinson, 2013. "Daily Needs, Income Targets and Labor Supply: Evidence from Kenya," NBER Working Papers 19264, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    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:nuf:econwp:1906. 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: Maxine Collett (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/economics/ .

    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.