Abstract
Using recall and diary food expenditure data from Canada, we compare estimates of the household size elasticity of per capita food expenditure. In contrast to Gibson (2002), we find negative elasticities in both recall and diary data. This in turn means we find evidence of the “Deaton–Paxson puzzle” in both diary and recall data. Recall error cannot be the sole explanation of the puzzle.
Highlights
In applied demand analysis, the income and household size elasticities of food expenditure play an important role, in thinking about the economies of scale in household consumption
For the purposes of illustration, that the food budget share is adequately modelled by wf = α0 + α1 ln pcy + β ln n + ε where wf is the food share, ln pcy is the logarithm of per capita income, and ln n is the logarithm of household size
If the food share can be taken as a welfare measure, economies of scale require that β be negative
Summary
The income and household size elasticities of food expenditure play an important role, in thinking about the economies of scale in household consumption. If the food share can be taken as a welfare measure (as Engel asserted), economies of scale require that β be negative (the budget share should fall with increasing household size, holding pcy constant). The 1996 Canadian Food Expenditure Survey (FoodEx) provides a unique opportunity to study how food expenditure measures constructed from recall questions compare to those obtained from expenditure diaries This nationally representative survey first asked respondents to estimate their household’s food expenditure over the past four weeks, along with basic demographic questions. These two surveys readily lend themselves to comparison.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.