Introducing Monopolistic Competition into the GTAP Model

T. Hertel, P. Swaminathan
{"title":"Introducing Monopolistic Competition into the GTAP Model","authors":"T. Hertel, P. Swaminathan","doi":"10.21642/gtap.tp06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This technical paper documents one approach to incorporating monopolistic competition into the GTAP model. In this framework, consumer preferences are heterogeneous, leading to an apparent \"love of variety\" in the aggregate utility function for each region. The more heterogeneous are preferences, the smaller the elasticity of substitution in the aggregate utility function, and the greater the value placed on the addition of new varieties. The same is true for firms, which experience lower unit costs for differentiated, intermediate inputs, as the number of varieties on offer increases. In order to meet the diverse needs of consumers, firms differentiate their products through research and development (R&D) as well as advertising activities. These costs are assumed to be invariant to the total volume of sales for a given variety of product. With production occurring at constant returns to scale, this gives rise to declining average total costs. A zero profits equilibrium in this model is characterized by firms marking up their price over marginal costs by an amount sufficient to cover the fixed costs associated with establishing a new variety in the marketplace. Since the optimal markup is itself determined by the elasticity of substitution among varieties, this establishes a direct relationship between fixed costs and the degree of preference heterogeneity. The main differences between the monopolistically competitive sectors and the traditional GTAP sectors may be summarized as follows: We introduce two new variables: n, the number of firms in the industry and qof, the output per firm. Minimum expenditure and unit costs are declining in n. Average total costs are declining in output per firm. Unlike the Armington specification, foreign and domestic firms compete directly in the representative consumer's utility function. We illustrate this framework with a 2 commodity/3 region example in which we eliminate US antidumping duti","PeriodicalId":281904,"journal":{"name":"GTAP Technical Paper Series","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"39","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GTAP Technical Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21642/gtap.tp06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 39

Abstract

This technical paper documents one approach to incorporating monopolistic competition into the GTAP model. In this framework, consumer preferences are heterogeneous, leading to an apparent "love of variety" in the aggregate utility function for each region. The more heterogeneous are preferences, the smaller the elasticity of substitution in the aggregate utility function, and the greater the value placed on the addition of new varieties. The same is true for firms, which experience lower unit costs for differentiated, intermediate inputs, as the number of varieties on offer increases. In order to meet the diverse needs of consumers, firms differentiate their products through research and development (R&D) as well as advertising activities. These costs are assumed to be invariant to the total volume of sales for a given variety of product. With production occurring at constant returns to scale, this gives rise to declining average total costs. A zero profits equilibrium in this model is characterized by firms marking up their price over marginal costs by an amount sufficient to cover the fixed costs associated with establishing a new variety in the marketplace. Since the optimal markup is itself determined by the elasticity of substitution among varieties, this establishes a direct relationship between fixed costs and the degree of preference heterogeneity. The main differences between the monopolistically competitive sectors and the traditional GTAP sectors may be summarized as follows: We introduce two new variables: n, the number of firms in the industry and qof, the output per firm. Minimum expenditure and unit costs are declining in n. Average total costs are declining in output per firm. Unlike the Armington specification, foreign and domestic firms compete directly in the representative consumer's utility function. We illustrate this framework with a 2 commodity/3 region example in which we eliminate US antidumping duti
将垄断竞争引入GTAP模型
这篇技术论文记录了将垄断竞争纳入GTAP模型的一种方法。在这个框架中,消费者偏好是异质的,导致每个地区的总效用函数出现明显的“多样性偏好”。偏好异质性越强,总效用函数的替代弹性越小,新品种的增加价值越大。企业也是如此,随着提供的品种数量的增加,差异化的中间投入的单位成本会降低。为了满足消费者的多样化需求,企业通过研发(R&D)和广告活动来实现产品的差异化。假定这些成本对给定品种产品的总销售量是不变的。由于生产按规模回报不变,这导致平均总成本下降。在这个模型中,零利润均衡的特点是,企业将其价格提高到高于边际成本的水平,其幅度足以覆盖与在市场上建立新品种相关的固定成本。由于最优加价本身是由品种间的替代弹性决定的,这就建立了固定成本与偏好异质性程度之间的直接关系。垄断竞争部门与传统GTAP部门之间的主要区别可以概括如下:我们引入了两个新变量:n,行业中的企业数量和qof,每个企业的产出。最小支出和单位成本在n中下降。每个企业的平均总成本在产量中下降。与阿明顿规范不同的是,国外和国内公司在代表性消费者的效用函数中直接竞争。我们用一个2商品/3地区的例子来说明这个框架,在这个例子中,我们消除了美国的反倾销税
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信