You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Estimation of Demand Systems Generated by the Gorman Polar Form; A Generalization of the S-Branch Utility Tree
Charles Blackorby, Richard Boyce and R. Robert Russell
Vol. 46, No. 2 (Mar., 1978), pp. 345-363
Published by: The Econometric Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1913905
Page Count: 19
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Price elasticity, Utility functions, Demand, Aggregate demand, Beef, Potatoes, Aggregation, Economic theory, Commodities, Peas
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Many demand system specifications employed in empirical studies are generated by utility functions which belong to the class that is characterized in the dual by what we call the "Gorman polar form." This class has the attractive property that membership is equivalent to the satisfaction of necessary and sufficient conditions for aggregation across consumers. We characterize the class of (direct) preference orderings that is dual to the Gorman polar form; this class includes, as special cases, homotheticity, affine homotheticity, and homotheticity to minus infinity. We also specify and estimate a member of this class which generalizes previously estimated specifications of Gorman polar forms.Finally, employing a likelihood ratio test, we reject the hypothesis that preferences are described by the S-branch utility tree (or, of course, any of its special cases) and concomitantly reject the hypothesis of affine homotheticity of preferences.
Econometrica © 1978 The Econometric Society