[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/spmain/hal-04347301.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Poor Substitutes? Counterfactual Methods in IO and Trade Compared

Author

Listed:
  • Keith Head

    (UBC - University of British Columbia, CEPR - Center for Economic Policy Research)

  • Thierry Mayer

    (ECON - Département d'économie (Sciences Po) - Sciences Po - Sciences Po - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CEPII - Centre d'études prospectives et d'informations internationales, CEPR - Center for Economic Policy Research)

Abstract
Constant elasticity of substitution (CES) demand for monopolistically competitive firm-varieties is a standard tool for models in international trade and macroeconomics. Inter-variety substitution in this model follows a simple share proportionality rule. In contrast, the standard toolkit in industrial organization (IO) estimates a demand system in which cross-elasticities depend on similarity in observable attributes. The gain in realism from the IO approach comes at the expense of requiring richer data and greater computational challenges. This paper uses the data generating process of Berry et al. (1995), BLP, who established the modern IO method, to simulate counterfactual trade policy experiments. We use the CES model as an approximation of the more complex underlying demand system and market structure. Although the CES model omits key elements of the data generating process, the errors are offsetting, allowing it to fit BLP-based predictions closely. For aggregate outcomes, it turns out that incorporating non-unitary pass-through matters more than fixing oversimplified substitution patterns.

Suggested Citation

  • Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2023. "Poor Substitutes? Counterfactual Methods in IO and Trade Compared," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-04347301, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:spmain:hal-04347301
    DOI: 10.1162/rest_a_01369
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://sciencespo.hal.science/hal-04347301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://sciencespo.hal.science/hal-04347301/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1162/rest_a_01369?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reynaert, Mathias & Verboven, Frank, 2014. "Improving the performance of random coefficients demand models: The role of optimal instruments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 179(1), pages 83-98.
    2. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    3. Jonas Björnerstedt & Frank Verboven, 2016. "Does Merger Simulation Work? Evidence from the Swedish Analgesics Market," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 125-164, July.
    4. Coşar, A. Kerem & Grieco, Paul L.E. & Li, Shengyu & Tintelnot, Felix, 2018. "What drives home market advantage?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 135-150.
    5. Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg & Frank Verboven, 2001. "The Evolution of Price Dispersion in the European Car Market," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 68(4), pages 811-848.
    6. James Levinsohn & Steven Berry & Ariel Pakes, 1999. "Voluntary Export Restraints on Automobiles: Evaluating a Trade Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 400-430, June.
    7. Pierre Dubois & Rachel Griffith & Martin O'Connell, 2020. "How Well Targeted Are Soda Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(11), pages 3661-3704, November.
    8. Christoph E. Boehm & Andrei A. Levchenko & Nitya Pandalai-Nayar, 2023. "The Long and Short (Run) of Trade Elasticities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(4), pages 861-905, April.
    9. Emi Nakamura & Dawit Zerom, 2010. "Accounting for Incomplete Pass-Through," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(3), pages 1192-1230.
    10. Kenneth E. Train & Clifford Winston, 2007. "Vehicle Choice Behavior And The Declining Market Share Of U.S. Automakers," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1469-1496, November.
    11. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2019. "Brands in Motion: How Frictions Shape Multinational Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(9), pages 3073-3124, September.
    12. Andrew Atkeson & Ariel Burstein, 2008. "Pricing-to-Market, Trade Costs, and International Relative Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1998-2031, December.
    13. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    14. Colin J. Hottman & Stephen J. Redding & David E. Weinstein, 2016. "Quantifying the Sources of Firm Heterogeneity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(3), pages 1291-1364.
    15. Rodrigo Adao & Arnaud Costinot & Dave Donaldson, 2017. "Nonparametric Counterfactual Predictions in Neoclassical Models of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(3), pages 633-689, March.
    16. Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2018. "Global Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(2), pages 565-619, June.
    17. Aviv Nevo, 2011. "Empirical Models of Consumer Behavior," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 51-75, September.
    18. Jonathan Eaton & Robert Dekle & Samuel Kortum, 2007. "Unbalanced Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 351-355, May.
    19. Laura Grigolon & Mathias Reynaert & Frank Verboven, 2018. "Consumer Valuation of Fuel Costs and Tax Policy: Evidence from the European Car Market," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 193-225, August.
    20. Bernard Salanie & Frank A. Wolak, 2018. "Fast, "robust", and approximately correct: estimating mixed demand systems," CeMMAP working papers CWP64/18, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    21. Steven Berry & James Levinsohn & Ariel Pakes, 2004. "Differentiated Products Demand Systems from a Combination of Micro and Macro Data: The New Car Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(1), pages 68-105, February.
    22. Volker Nocke & Nicolas Schutz, 2018. "Multiproduct‐Firm Oligopoly: An Aggregative Games Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 523-557, March.
    23. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/mlkvtnbqe9pg8nsvf612mcnbs is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Amil Petrin, 2002. "Quantifying the Benefits of New Products: The Case of the Minivan," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(4), pages 705-729, August.
    25. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    26. Isaiah Andrews & Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2017. "Measuring the Sensitivity of Parameter Estimates to Estimation Moments," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(4), pages 1553-1592.
    27. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2019. "Brands in Motion: How Frictions Shape Multinational Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(9), pages 3073-3124, September.
    28. Christopher Conlon & Jeff Gortmaker, 2020. "Best practices for differentiated products demand estimation with PyBLP," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(4), pages 1108-1161, December.
    29. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2021. "Foundations of Demand Estimation," NBER Working Papers 29305, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    30. Monika Mrázová & J. Peter Neary, 2017. "Not So Demanding: Demand Structure and Firm Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(12), pages 3835-3874, December.
    31. Goldberg, Pinelopi Koujianou, 1995. "Product Differentiation and Oligopoly in International Markets: The Case of the U.S. Automobile Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 891-951, July.
    32. Christopher R. Knittel & Konstantinos Metaxoglou, 2014. "Estimation of Random-Coefficient Demand Models: Two Empiricists' Perspective," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(1), pages 34-59, March.
    33. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    34. Frank Verboven, 1996. "International Price Discrimination in the European Car Market," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(2), pages 240-268, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mohapatra, Debashrita, 2024. "Estimating substitution patterns and demand curvature in Discrete-Choice models of product differentiation," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343538, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2019. "Brands in Motion: How Frictions Shape Multinational Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(9), pages 3073-3124, September.
    2. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2021. "Foundations of Demand Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2301, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Mogens Fosgerau & Julien Monardo & André de Palma, 2024. "The Inverse Product Differentiation Logit Model," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 329-370, November.
    4. Marco Guerzoni & Rene Soellner, 2013. "Uniqueness Seeking and Demand Estimation in the German Automobile Industry," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(2), pages 179-199, December.
    5. Amit Gandhi & Jean-François Houde, 2019. "Measuring Substitution Patterns in Differentiated-Products Industries," NBER Working Papers 26375, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Tovar, Jorge, 2012. "Consumers’ Welfare and Trade Liberalization: Evidence from the Car Industry in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 808-820.
    7. Federico Ciliberto & GianCarlo Moschini & Edward D. Perry, 2019. "Valuing product innovation: genetically engineered varieties in US corn and soybeans," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(3), pages 615-644, September.
    8. Laura Grigolon, 2021. "Blurred boundaries: A flexible approach for segmentation applied to the car market," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(4), pages 1273-1305, November.
    9. Bokhari, Farasat A.S. & Mariuzzo, Franco, 2018. "Demand estimation and merger simulations for drugs: Logits v. AIDS," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 653-685.
    10. Matthew Backus & Christopher Conlon & Michael Sinkinson, 2021. "Common Ownership and Competition in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," NBER Working Papers 28350, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Rodrigo Adão & Costas Arkolakis & Federico Esposito, 2019. "General Equilibrium Effects in Space: Theory and Measurement," NBER Working Papers 25544, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/mlkvtnbqe9pg8nsvf612mcnbs is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Pesendorfer, Martin & Schiraldi, Pasquale & Silva-Junior, Daniel, 2023. "Omitted budget constraint bias in discrete-choice demand models," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    14. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/mlkvtnbqe9pg8nsvf612mcnbs is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Leheyda, Nina, 2008. "Private Incentives to Innovate: Interplay of New Products and Brand-Name Reputation," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-120, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Rachel Griffith & Lars Nesheim & Martin O'Connell, 2018. "Income effects and the welfare consequences of tax in differentiated product oligopoly," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 305-341, March.
    17. Jaumandreu, Jordi & Moral, Maria Jose, 2006. "Identifying behaviour in a multiproduct oligopoly: Incumbents reaction to tariffs dismantling," MPRA Paper 1248, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Friberg, Richard & Huse, Cristian, 2012. "How to use demand systems to evaluate risky projects, with an application to automobile production," CEPR Discussion Papers 9266, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Volker Nocke & Nicolas Schutz, 2018. "An Aggregative Games Approach to Merger Analysis in Multiproduct-Firm Oligopoly," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2018_024, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    20. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2014. "Identification in Differentiated Products Markets Using Market Level Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 1749-1797, September.
    21. Miravete, Eugenio J. & Seim, Katja & Thurk, Jeff, 2023. "Pass-through and tax incidence in differentiated product markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    22. Pesendorfer, Martin & Schiraldi, Pasquale & Silva-Junior, Daniel, 2023. "Omitted budget constraint bias in discrete-choice demand models," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117353, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Constant Elasticity of Substitution; Industrial Organization; Oligopoly; Trade; Tariffs; Counterfactual analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:spmain:hal-04347301. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Contact - Sciences Po Departement of Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.