%33 œ #зР8 1 - %3Q
%34 œ #4p48 ’1 -%3Q
(9)
(10)
In comparing these to the own- and cross-price elasticities of the standard semilog model
(Table 1), both have an extra term involving own income elasticity (1 - %3Q) which
allows more flexibility in the values the elasticities can take.
As with the semilog system, in the DS system the own- and cross- price
elasticities have the relative relationship within a given Marshalian demand,
%34/%35 œ #4p48/#5p58,
though it has greater flexibility in the elasticity of a given price in own demand relative to
other demands,
%34/%54 œ’1-%3Q“/’1-%5Q
which depends on the income elasticities of both goods. In the semilog system, by
contrast, %34/%54 œ 1.
While (6)-(8) indicate that the DS system has a greater flexibility in
representation of Marshallian elasticities, it still embodies some restrictions, due to its
relatively simple functional forms for estimation and relatively small number of
parameters to be estimated. From (9) and (10), it can be seen that the own- and cross-
price elasticities of demand for good i are related to the income elasticity; this
relationship is
More intriguing information
1. Industrial Employment Growth in Spanish Regions - the Role Played by Size, Innovation, and Spatial Aspects2. Government spending composition, technical change and wage inequality
3. Regional differentiation in the Russian federation: A cluster-based typification
4. Voluntary Teaming and Effort
5. AN EXPLORATION OF THE NEED FOR AND COST OF SELECTED TRADE FACILITATION MEASURES IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WTO NEGOTIATIONS
6. The name is absent
7. Regionale Wachstumseffekte der GRW-Förderung? Eine räumlich-ökonometrische Analyse auf Basis deutscher Arbeitsmarktregionen
8. A Hybrid Neural Network and Virtual Reality System for Spatial Language Processing
9. Bridging Micro- and Macro-Analyses of the EU Sugar Program: Methods and Insights
10. The name is absent