Imperfect competition and congestion in the City

_______________________________Free-entry eq		uilibrium: n^e_________________________________
	No congestion	Unpriced congestion	Congestion & fine toll_______________________
n^e___________________	3.7	5.014	4.407_______________
p^e- w^e______________	0.54____________________	0.66_________________	0.65_________________
Welfare [hr]_______	10.565_________________	10.235 (reference)	10.384 (reference)
s (index) 26,309	∞_____________	100_________________	100_________________
____________________Optimized number of subcenters: n°(s); s = 100____________________
n°(s)_______________	2.7______________________	4.35_________________	3.78_________________
Welfare gain______	0.023___________________	0.004_______________	0.008_______________
_____________Optimized number of subcenters n° and optimized road size s°_____________
s° (index)__________		94_________________	67_________________
n°________________		5.333________________	5.333________________
Welfare gain wrt “reference”________		0.124	0.123

Table 2 Numerical illustration for the Base case parameters: μ^w = μ^d = 0.2.

_______________________________Free-entry eq		uilibrium: n^e_________________________________
	No congestion	Unpriced congestion	Congestion & fine toll_______________________
n^e___________________	9	10.523	9.811______________
p^e- w^e	1.33____________________	1.46________________	1.45________________
Welfare [hr]	11.882______________	11.588 (reference)	11.728 (reference)
s (index) 12,536	∞_____________	100_________________	100_________________
____________________Optimized number of subcenters: n°(s); s = 100____________________
n°(s)________________	_8______________________	9.83________________	8.99_______________
Welfare gain	0.009________________	0.004_____________	~ 0_______________
_____________Optimized number of subcenters n° and optimized road size s°_____________
s° (index)		66________________	47_______________
n°		16_________________	16_________________
Welfare gain wrt “reference”________		0.629	0.631

Table 3 Numerical illustration for the Base case parameters: μ^w = μ^d = 0.6.

More intriguing information

1. Happiness in Eastern Europe
2. The name is absent
3. NATURAL RESOURCE SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: A COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM APPROACH
4. Multiple Arrhythmogenic Substrate for Tachycardia in a
5. Does adult education at upper secondary level influence annual wage earnings?
6. The effect of classroom diversity on tolerance and participation in England, Sweden and Germany
7. The name is absent
8. Backpropagation Artificial Neural Network To Detect Hyperthermic Seizures In Rats
9. The name is absent
10. Banking Supervision in Integrated Financial Markets: Implications for the EU
11. Spousal Labor Market Effects from Government Health Insurance: Evidence from a Veterans Affairs Expansion
12. Determinants of Household Health Expenditure: Case of Urban Orissa
13. The name is absent
14. School Effectiveness in Developing Countries - A Summary of the Research Evidence
15. The technological mediation of mathematics and its learning
16. DISCRIMINATORY APPROACH TO AUDITORY STIMULI IN GUINEA FOWL (NUMIDA MELEAGRIS) AFTER HYPERSTRIATAL∕HIPPOCAMP- AL BRAIN DAMAGE
17. Ultrametric Distance in Syntax
18. Multimedia as a Cognitive Tool
19. AGRIBUSINESS EXECUTIVE EDUCATION AND KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE: NEW MECHANISMS OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT INVOLVING THE UNIVERSITY, PRIVATE FIRM STAKEHOLDERS AND PUBLIC SECTOR
20. The name is absent