1 exchange molly w. dahl georgetown university econ 101 – spring 2009

76
1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

Upload: joleen-alexander

Post on 26-Dec-2015

219 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

1

Exchange

Molly W. DahlGeorgetown UniversityEcon 101 – Spring 2009

Page 2: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

2

Exchange

Two consumers, A and B. Their endowments of goods 1 and 2

are

E.g. The total quantities available

A A A( , )1 2 B B B( , ).1 2and

A ( , )6 4 B ( , ).2 2and

1 1 6 2 8A B

2 2 4 2 6A B

units of good 1

units of good 2.and

are

Page 3: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

3

Starting an Edgeworth Box

Width = 1 1 6 2 8A B

Height = 2 2

4 2

6

A B

The dimensions ofthe box are thequantities availableof the goods.

Page 4: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

4

Feasible Allocations

What allocations of the 8 units of good 1 and the 6 units of good 2 are feasible?

One feasible allocation is the before-trade allocation i.e. the endowment allocation.

Page 5: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

5

A ( , )6 4OA

OB

6

8B ( , )2 2

The Endowment Allocation

Page 6: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

6

A ( , )6 4OA

OB

6

8

4

6

The Endowment Allocation

Page 7: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

7

B ( , )2 2

OA

OB

6

8

4

6

2

2The Endowment Allocation

Page 8: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

8

A ( , )6 4B ( , )2 2

OA

OB

6

8

4

6

2

2

Theendowmentallocation

The Endowment Allocation

Page 9: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

9

The Endowment Allocation

OA

OB

Theendowmentallocation

1 1A B

2A

2

2

A

B

1A

1B

2B

Page 10: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

10

Other Feasible Allocations

denotes an allocation to consumer A.

denotes an allocation to consumer B.

An allocation is feasible if and only if

( , )x xA A1 2

( , )x xB B1 2

x xA B A B1 1 1 1

x xA B A B2 2 2 2 .and

Page 11: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

11

Feasible Reallocation

OA

OB

1 1A B

xA2

2

2

A

B

xA1

xB1

xB2

Page 12: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

12

Feasible Reallocation

OA

OB

1 1A B

xA2

2

2

A

B

xA1

xB1

xB2

Page 13: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

13

Feasible Reallocations

All points in the box, including the boundary, represent feasible allocations of the combined endowments.

Page 14: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

14

Feasible Reallocations

All points in the box, including the boundary, represent feasible allocations of the combined endowments.

Which allocations will be blocked by one or both consumers?

Which allocations make both consumers better off?

Page 15: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

15

Adding Preferences to the Box

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

More preferred

For consumer A.

OA

Page 16: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

16

Adding Preferences to the BoxxB2

xB1

More preferred

For consumer B.

OB

2B

1B

Page 17: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

17

Adding Preferences to the Box

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

More preferred

For consumer B. OB

Page 18: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

18

Edgeworth Box

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Page 19: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

19

Pareto-Improvement

An allocation of the endowment that improves the welfare of a consumer without reducing the welfare of another is a Pareto-improving allocation.

Where are the Pareto-improving allocations?

Page 20: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

20

Edgeworth Box

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Page 21: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

21

Pareto-Improvements

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

The set of Pareto-improving allocations

Page 22: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

22

Pareto-Improvements

Since each consumer can refuse to trade, the only possible outcomes from exchange are Pareto-improving allocations.

But which particular Pareto-improving allocation will be the outcome of trade?

Page 23: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

23

Pareto-Improvements

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

The set of Pareto-improving reallocations

Page 24: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

24

Pareto-Improvements

Page 25: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

25

Pareto-Improvements

Page 26: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

26

Pareto-Improvements

Tradeimproves bothA’s and B’s welfares.This is a Pareto-improvementover the endowment allocation.

Page 27: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

27

Pareto-ImprovementsNew mutual gains-to-trade region is the set of all further Pareto- improving reallocations.

Tradeimproves bothA’s and B’s welfares.This is a Pareto-improvementover the endowment allocation.

Page 28: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

28

Pareto-Improvements

Further trade cannot improve both A and B’s welfares.

Page 29: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

29

Pareto-Optimality

Better forconsumer B

Better forconsumer A

Page 30: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

30

Pareto-OptimalityA is strictly better off but B is strictly worse off

B is strictly betteroff but A is strictlyworse off

Both Aand B are worse off

Both A andB are worseoff

Page 31: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

31

Pareto-Optimality

The allocation isPareto-optimal since theonly way one consumer’swelfare can be increased is todecrease the welfare of the otherconsumer.

Page 32: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

32

Pareto-Optimality

The allocation isPareto-optimal since theonly way one consumer’swelfare can be increased is todecrease the welfare of the otherconsumer.

An allocation where convexindifference curves are “only just back-to-back” is Pareto-optimal.

Page 33: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

33

Pareto-Optimality

Where are all of the Pareto-optimal allocations of the endowment?

Page 34: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

34

Pareto-Optimality

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

All the allocations marked bya are Pareto-optimal.

Page 35: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

35

Pareto-Optimality

The contract curve is the set of all Pareto-optimal allocations.

Page 36: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

36

Pareto-Optimality

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

All the allocations marked bya are Pareto-optimal.

The contract curve

Page 37: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

37

Pareto-Optimality

But to which of the many allocations on the contract curve will consumers trade?

That depends upon how trade is conducted.

In perfectly competitive markets? By one-on-one bargaining?

Page 38: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

38

The Core

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

The set of Pareto-improving reallocations

Page 39: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

39

The Core

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Page 40: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

40

The Core

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Pareto-optimal trades blocked by B

Pareto-optimal trades blocked by A

Page 41: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

41

The Core

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Pareto-optimal trades not blocked by A or B are the core.

Page 42: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

42

The Core The core is the set of all Pareto-optimal

allocations that are welfare-improving for both consumers relative to their own endowments.

Rational trade should achieve a core allocation.

Page 43: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

43

The Core

But which core allocation? Again, that depends upon the manner in

which trade is conducted.

Page 44: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

44

Trade in Competitive Markets

Consider trade in perfectly competitive markets.

Each consumer is a price-taker trying to maximize her own utility given p1, p2 and her own endowment. That is, ...

Page 45: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

45

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

For consumer A.

p x p x p pA A A A1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2

x A2*

x A1*

Page 46: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

46

Trade in Competitive Markets

So given p1 and p2, consumer A’s net demands for commodities 1 and 2 are

x A A1 1* x A A

2 2* . and

Page 47: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

47

Trade in Competitive Markets

2B

1B

xB2

xB1

For consumer B.

OB x B1*

x B2*

p x p x p pB B B B1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2

Page 48: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

48

Trade in Competitive Markets

So given p1 and p2, consumer B’s net demands for commodities 1 and 2 are

x B B1 1* x B B

2 2* . and

Page 49: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

49

Trade in Competitive Markets

A general equilibrium occurs when prices p1 and p2 cause both the markets for commodities 1 and 2 to clear; i.e.

x xA B A B1 1 1 1* *

x xA B A B2 2 2 2* * . and

Page 50: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

50

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Can this PO allocation beachieved?

Page 51: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

51

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Budget constraint for consumer A

Page 52: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

52

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Budget constraint for consumer A

x A2*

x A1*

Page 53: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

53

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Budget constraint for consumer B

x A2*

x A1*

Page 54: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

54

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Budget constraint for consumer B

x A2*

x A1*

x B1*

x B2*

Page 55: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

55

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

x A2*

x A1*

x B1*

x B2*

But x xA B A B1 1 1 1* *

Page 56: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

56

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

x A2*

x A1*

x B1*

x B2*

and x xA B A B2 2 2 2* *

Page 57: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

57

Trade in Competitive Markets

So at the given prices p1 and p2 there is an excess supply of commodity 1 excess demand for commodity 2.

Neither market clears so the prices p1 and p2 do not cause a general equilibrium.

Page 58: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

58

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

So this PO allocation cannot beachieved by competitive trading.

Page 59: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

59

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Which PO allocations can beachieved by competitive trading?

Page 60: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

60

Trade in Competitive Markets

Since there is an excess demand for commodity 2, p2 will rise.

Since there is an excess supply of commodity 1, p1 will fall.

The slope of the budget constraints is -p1/p2 so the budget constraints will pivot about the endowment point and become less steep.

Page 61: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

61

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Which PO allocations can beachieved by competitive trading?

Page 62: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

62

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Which PO allocations can beachieved by competitive trading?

Page 63: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

63

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Budget constraint for consumer A

x A2*

x A1*

Page 64: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

64

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Budget constraint for consumer B

x A2*

x A1*

x B1*

x B2*

Page 65: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

65

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

x A2*

x A1*

x B1*

x B2*

So x xA B A B1 1 1 1* *

Page 66: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

66

Trade in Competitive Markets

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

x A2*

x A1*

x B1*

x B2*

and x xA B A B2 2 2 2* *

Page 67: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

67

Trade in Competitive Markets At the new prices p1 and p2 both

markets clear; there is a general equilibrium.

Trading in competitive markets achieves a particular Pareto-optimal allocation of the endowments.

This is an example of the First Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics.

Page 68: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

68

First Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics

Given that consumers’ preferences are well-behaved, trading in perfectly competitive markets implements a Pareto-optimal allocation of the economy’s endowment.

Page 69: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

69

Second Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics

The First Theorem is followed by a second that states that any Pareto-optimal allocation (i.e. any point on the contract curve) can be achieved by trading in competitive markets provided that endowments are first appropriately rearranged amongst the consumers.

Page 70: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

70

Given that consumers’ preferences are well-behaved, for any Pareto-optimal allocation there are prices and an allocation of the total endowment that makes the Pareto-optimal allocation implementable by trading in competitive markets.

Second Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics

Page 71: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

71

Second Fundamental Theorem

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

The contract curve

Page 72: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

72

Second Fundamental Theorem

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

A*2x B*

2x

A*1x

B*1x

Page 73: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

73

Second Fundamental Theorem

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

A*2x B*

2x

A*1x

B*1x

Implemented by competitivetrading from the endowment .

Page 74: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

74

Second Fundamental Theorem

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Can this allocation be implementedby competitive trading from ?

Page 75: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

75

Second Fundamental Theorem

2A

1A

xA2

xA1

OA

2B

1B

xB1

xB2

OB

Can this allocation be implementedby competitive trading from ? No.

Page 76: 1 Exchange Molly W. Dahl Georgetown University Econ 101 – Spring 2009

76

Second Fundamental TheoremxA2

xA1

OA

xB1

xB2

OB

But this allocation is implementedby competitive trading from .

A1

B2

B1

A2