[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ijamad/335132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weak Separability Testing and Estimation of Selected Food Commodities Demand System in Urban Households of Iran (Case of Citrus Fruits, Cucurbits and Vegetables)

Author

Listed:
  • Delavar, Amin
  • Yavari, Gholamreza
  • Yazdani, Saeed
  • Amjadi, Afshin
  • Mahmoodi, Abolfazl
Abstract
The separability of consumer desires is a necessary condition for multi-stage budgeting and collectivization is consistent of commodity where costs are allocated between edible groups using price indices and intergroup allocations are made independent of other groups. In empirical studies of demand, the concept of separation is used to correctly estimate demand function and limit the number of parameters. For this purpose, data related to price index and cost of selected commodities (citrus fruits, cucurbits, and vegetables) derived from the Central Bank over 2016 in urban households of Iran were used. The results of the separability tests support the hypothesis that consumers first allocate their income to selected commodities in three groups (citrus fruits, cucurbits, and vegetables) and then approves the income allocation action between the types of its subgroups that are grouped. Also, the results of the system estimation showed that all groups had a negative intrinsic price elasticity. In the meantime, the price elasticity of the groups of citrus fruits (orange, tangerines, and lemon), cucurbits fruits (potato, tomato, and onion) and vegetables (the leafy ones) are equal to -0.83, -0.48 and -0.91, respectively. Given the income elasticity calculated for the three commodity groups, the second commodity group (potato, tomato, and onion) is more essential than the other commodity groups, which should be considered in government policies as to agricultural production and pricing.

Suggested Citation

  • Delavar, Amin & Yavari, Gholamreza & Yazdani, Saeed & Amjadi, Afshin & Mahmoodi, Abolfazl, 2020. "Weak Separability Testing and Estimation of Selected Food Commodities Demand System in Urban Households of Iran (Case of Citrus Fruits, Cucurbits and Vegetables)," International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development (IJAMAD), Iranian Association of Agricultural Economics, vol. 10(3), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ijamad:335132
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.335132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/335132/files/IJAMAD_Volume%2010_Issue%203_Pages%20293-305.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.335132?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William A. Barnett & Seungmook Choi, 2004. "A Monte Carlo Study of Tests of Blockwise Weak Separability," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Functional Structure and Approximation in Econometrics, pages 257-287, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    2. Alboghdady, Mohamed Altabei & Alashry, Mohamed Khairy, 2010. "The demand for meat in Egypt: An almost ideal estimation," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 4(1), March.
    3. William A. Barnett, 1979. "Theoretical Foundations for the Rotterdam Model," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(1), pages 109-130.
    4. Baccouche, Rafiq & Laisney, Francois, 1991. "Describing the Separability Properties of Empirical Demand Systems," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(2), pages 181-206, April-Jun.
    5. Barten, Anton P, 1993. "Consumer Allocation Models: Choice of Functional Form," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 129-158.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. William A. Barnett & Isaac Kalonda Kanyama, 2013. "Time-varying parameters in the almost ideal demand system and the Rotterdam model: will the best specification please stand up?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(29), pages 4169-4183, October.
    2. William A. Barnett & Isaac Kalonda Kanyama, 2013. "Time-varying parameters in the almost ideal demand system and the Rotterdam model: will the best specification please stand up?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(29), pages 4169-4183, October.
    3. Holt, Matthew T., 2002. "Inverse demand systems and choice of functional form," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 117-142, January.
    4. William Barnett & Ousmane Seck, 2006. "Rotterdam vs Almost Ideal Models: Will the Best Demand Specification Please Stand Up?," WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS 200605, University of Kansas, Department of Economics.
    5. Clements, Kenneth W. & Gao, Grace, 2015. "The Rotterdam demand model half a century on," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 91-103.
    6. William A. Barnett & Ousmane Seck, 2008. "Rotterdam model versus almost ideal demand system: will the best specification please stand up?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(6), pages 795-824.
    7. Binner, Jane & Elger, Thomas & de Peretti, Philipe, 2002. "Is UK Risky Money Weakly Separable? A Stochastic Approach," Working Papers 2002:13, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    8. Erkan Erdil, 2006. "Demand systems for agricultural products in OECD countries," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 163-169.
    9. Toshinobu Matsuda, 2005. "Differential Demand Systems: A Further Look at Barten's Synthesis," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(3), pages 607-619, January.
    10. Jon P. Nelson, 1999. "Broadcast Advertising and U.S. Demand for Alcoholic Beverages," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(4), pages 774-790, April.
    11. Barnett, William A. & Erwin Diewert, W. & Zellner, Arnold, 2011. "Introduction to measurement with theory," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 161(1), pages 1-5, March.
    12. Barnett, William A. & Serletis, Apostolos, 2008. "The Differential Approach to Demand Analysis and the Rotterdam Model," MPRA Paper 12319, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Shumway, C. Richard & Davis, George C., 2001. "Does consistent aggregation really matter?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(2), pages 1-34.
    14. David Edgerton & Donald Dutkowsky & Thomas Elger & Barry Jones, 2005. "Toward a unified approach to testing for weak separability," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(20), pages 1-7.
    15. James J. Heckman & Apostolos Serletis, "undated". "Introduction to Internally Consistent Modeling, Aggregation, Inference, and Policy," Working Papers 2014-73, Department of Economics, University of Calgary, revised 29 Sep 2014.
    16. Barnett, William A. & de Peretti, Philippe, 2009. "Admissible Clustering Of Aggregator Components: A Necessary And Sufficient Stochastic Seminonparametric Test For Weak Separability," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(S2), pages 317-334, September.
    17. Yeboah, Godfred & Maynard, Leigh J., 2004. "The Impact Of Bse, Fmd, And U.S. Export Promotion Expenditures On Japanese Meat Demand," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 19978, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. Hjertstrand, Per & Swofford, James L. & Whitney, Gerald A., 2020. "Testing for Weak Separability and Utility Maximization with Incomplete Adjustment," Working Paper Series 1327, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 30 May 2023.
    19. Lee, Min-Yang A. & Thunberg, Eric M., 2012. "An Inverse Demand System for New England Groundfish: Welfare Analysis of the Transition to Catch Share Management," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 123879, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Farm Management;

    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:ags:ijamad:335132. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iraesea.html .

    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.