Skip to main content

Part of the book series: International Economics and Institutions ((INTERNAT.ECON.))

  • 42 Accesses

Abstract

It is the aim of this chapter to provide the microeconomic fundamentals necessary to set up a realistic model of consumer behavior that could form the basis of an empirical analysis. Particular attention is paid to the factors explaining individual heterogeneity and the substitutability of goods. Gradually resolving the most stringent assumptions of the standard neoclassical model of consumer demand, models are surveyed that allow for multiple “representative consumers”, socioeconomic characteristics other than income, heterogeneous goods, or product differentiation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cf. Malinvaud (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cf. Debreu (1959).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cf. Deaton (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Homothetic preferences are represented by linear homogeneous direct utility functions.

    Google Scholar 

  5. The discounted value of the utility function in a given period is equivalent to the subutility or felicity function for the respective period. Cf. Deaton (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bellman’s principle of optimality (Bellman, 1957) states that optimality of consumption over time implies optimality of consumption for each period of time.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cf. Becker (1965, 1975) or Becker and Michael (1973). Cf. also Gronau (1973, 1976, 1977). The term “household production” is slightly misleading, as the basic model refers to individuals rather than households. Extensions to larger decision-making units are clearly possible, however.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Becker (1965, p. 496).

    Google Scholar 

  9. This assumption implies that the purchase of market goods takes zero time. Alternatively, a fixed relation between the consumption of market goods and time could be established, assuming firstly a limitational production function and secondly time-intensive consumption of market goods. Cf. e.g. Zimmermann (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  10. For a detailed description of joint production in household production models cf. Zimmermann (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cf. Lancaster (1966, p. 139).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cf. Lancaster (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lancaster (1966, 1971) claims that only major price changes affect the efficiency frontier, which is not necessarily correct. Infinitesimal price changes may induce the exclusion of inefficient goods if the angle between the two intersecting facets is close enough to 180°.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cf. Lancaster (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  15. In fact, Lancaster does consider factors like “human capital”, although not explicitly, when analyzing the effects of advertisements on the individual’s perception of qualities for instance. Cf. Lancaster (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  16. It should be noted that the extended version of the household production model in the life cycle by Becker and Lewis (1973) does consider a measurable quality of the respective commodity (children). It remains doubtful, however, how the quality of children could be quantified in reality.

    Google Scholar 

  17. The presentation of the Kuhn-Tucker conditions follows Lee and Pitt (1986). It deviates from the (standard) presentation chosen e.g. by Chiang (1984, pp. 722–724).

    Google Scholar 

  18. For the concept of virtual prices (or, equivalently, shadow prices) cf. Neary and Roberts (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  19. For a survey of models describing the firms’ choice of the production locations cf. Beckmann and Thisse (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rarely will goods, although being tradable, be delivered to the consumers’ doorstep. Goods are typically offered at distinct locations instead, which are at relatively close distance to each other (retailers, shopping centers, physicians, etc.). In reality, transportation costs thus arise for the consumers who “shop around” and collect diverse goods at diverse locations. As these transportation costs can be assumed to be fairly minor, however, they will be henceforth neglected to simplify the presentation.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cf. Boehm, Herzog, and Schlottmann (1991) or Zax (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cf. Alonso (1964), Muth (1969), or Straszheim (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cf. Becker (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cf. Clark and Hunter (1992) or Boehm, Herzog, and Schlottmann (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cf. Harris and Todaro (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Cf. Hausman (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cf. also Ott (1992).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Eymann, A. (1995). Microeconomic Essentials. In: Consumers’ Spatial Choice Behavior. International Economics and Institutions. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-50325-2_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-50325-2_2

  • Publisher Name: Physica-Verlag HD

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-0852-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-50325-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics