Decomposing the Slutsky Decomposition for the First Time in a Century
Abstract
The Slutsky decomposition is a mathematical formula which has been used for a very long time in economics to analyze how the demand for a good changes when its price goes up. Such a change in the demand is called the price effect. Most people will expect a decrease in the demand in response to a rise in the price. In other words, they will have a downward sloping demand curve in mind. Indeed they are right in usual cases.In terms of economicsit is said that the price effect is usually negative. But why? The Slutsky decomposition gives a correct answer to this question by decomposing the price effect into the substitution effect and the income effect. It is already known that the substitution effect is always negative, while the income effect is also negative if a good under considerationis “normal.”Since the sum of the two effects equals the price effect, it can be concluded that a demand for the good decreases when its price goes up, or the demand curve is downward sloping, in a “normal” situation. The Slutsky decomposition is so elegant and powerful that there would not be any economist who studies consumer behavior without mentioning it. Then, is there other decomposition than the Slutsky? This paperintroduces a new one which decomposes the price effect into the unit-elasticity effect and the ratio effect. The unit-elasticity effect means by how much the demand decreases in response to a rise in the price with the expenditure on it as fixed. The ratio effect means by how much the demand changes due to a change in the ratio of the expenditure on it to total income. The former effect is always negative, but the latter effect may be positive even in a “normal” situation. It is shown that anew decomposition is obtained by decomposing the Slutsky decomposition.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Slutsky, Eugen E., 1915, “Sulla Teoria del Bilancio del Consumatore,” Giornale degli Economisti e Rivista di Statistica (now The Italian Economic Journal),Vol. 51, 1-26. Translated as “On the Theory of the Budget of the Consumer, ” in George J. Stigler and Kenneth E. Boulding, eds., 1952, Readings in Price Theory, Chicago: Richard D. Irwin, 27-56.
Barnett, Vincent, 2011, E.E. Slutsky as Economist and Mathematician: Crossing the Limits of Knowledge, London: Routledge.
Chipman, John S., and Jean-SébastienLenfant, 2002, “Slutsky’s 1915 Article: How It Came to Be Found and Interpreted,”History of Political Economy, Vol. 34, 553-597.
Sasakura, Kazuyuki, 2016, “Slutsky Revisited: A New Decomposition of the PriceEffect,”Italian Economic Journal, Vol. 2, 253-280.
Doi, Junko, KazumichiIwasa, and Koji Shimomura, 2009, “Giffen Behavior Independent of the Wealth Level,”Economic Theory, Vol. 41, 247-267.
Battalio, Raymond C., John H. Kagel, and Carl A. Kogut, 1991, “Experimental Confirmation of the Existence of a Giffen Good,”American Economic Review,Vol. 81, 961-970.
Jensen, Robert T., and Nolan H. Miller, 2008, “Giffen Behavior and Subsistence Consumption,”American Economic Review, Vol. 98, 1553-1577.
Hicks, John R., 1939, Value and Capital: An Inquiry into Some Fundamental Principles of Economic Theory, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (2nd Edition, 1946.)
Krugman, Paul, and Robin Wells, 2009, Microeconomics, 2nd Edition, New York: Worth Publishers.
Nicholson, Walter, and Christopher Snyder, 2017, Microeconomic Theory: Basic Principles and Extensions, 12th Edition, Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18686/fm.v2i2.1054
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
