Eugene Silberberg

Bio: Eugene Silberberg is an academic researcher from University of Washington. The author has contributed to research in topics: Comparative statics & Short run. The author has an hindex of 7, co-authored 11 publications receiving 918 citations.

The Structure of Economics: A Mathematical Analysis

Abstract: 1. Comparative Statics and the Paradigm of Economics 2. Review of Calculus (One Variable) 3. Functions of Several Variables 4. Profit Maximization 5. Matrices and Determinants 6. Comparative Statics: The Traditional Methodology 7. The Envelope Theorem and Duality 8. The Derivation of Cost functions 9. Cost and Production Functions: Special Topics 10. The Derivation of Consumer Demand Functions 11. Special topics in Consumer Theory 12. Intertemporal Choice 13. Behavior under Uncertainty 14. Maximization with Inequality and Nonnegativity Constraints 15. Contracts and Incentives* 16. Markets with Imperfect Information* 17. General Equilibrium I: Linear Models 18. General Equilibrium II: Nonlinear Models 19. Welfare Economics 20. Resource Allocation over Time: Optimal Control theory *New Chapter

Ideology and legislator shirking

Abstract: We argue that legislator shirking (voting on the basis of personal ideology rather than the interests of one's constituents) can exist, but its appearance should conform to the law of demand We test and confirm this theory using votes on defense expenditure bills in the US Senate in 1982 We assume the cost of shirking is relatively higher on narrowly focused bills on specific weapons systems with well-defined beneficiaries, and relatively lower on general defense expenditure bills with uncertain final distribution of funds We find greater influence for senators' ideology in general versus specific bills

The Diffusion of Tractor Technology

Abstract: A substantial literature exists claiming the adoption of tractors was inefficiently slow. We develop a linear programming model of farms that specifically incorporates the opportunity cost of the farmer's time and apply it to farms in Iowa during the interwar period. We develop technological coefficients derived at the task level, based on the data and agricultural reports from that period. By valuing the time saved by tractors, we demonstrate that the seemingly slow rate of tractor adoption was in fact wealth maximizing. Tractors were widely adopted only after the improvement in implements that came late in this period. F or much of the last generation, economists have been saying that the adoption of the tractor was "too slow." We contend that this perception is in part the result of an incorrect application of Paul David's 1966 threshold model. That model plausibly assumes that producers will switch to the most efficient (least cost) technology for accomplishing a task or set of tasks. Previous studies have focused on only one part of farming-raising crops. In this article we develop a model that incorporates the opportunity cost of the farmer's time and we apply the model to farmers in Iowa in the interwar period, a time when tractors came to resemble the machines we now recognize by that name. That is, we model the tractor adoption decision not as a horses or tractor decision, but rather as a horse farming versus horse and tractor farming decision. We show that an important reason why farmers switched to tractors was because they provided farmers with more time for noncrop activities, such as raising livestock, improving the farm infrastructure, or working off the farm. In fact it is more accurate to say that the tractor, by freeing up a farm owner's time to raise livestock or work off the farm, increased the opportunity cost of growing crops. With these results, explanations such as market imperfections and "lumpiness" of the inputs are not needed. The imperfect capital market explanation seems particularly suspect: farmers in fact bought cars, a purchase of comparable expense to tractors. In 1920, 74 percent of Iowa farms reported automo

Multi-Agent Systems for the Simulation of Land-Use and Land-Cover Change: A Review

Abstract: This paper presents an overview of multi-agent system models of land-use/cover change (MAS/LUCC models). This special class of LUCC models combines a cellular landscape model with agent-based representations of decisionmaking, integrating the two components through specification of interdependencies and feedbacks between agents and their environment. The authors review alternative LUCC modeling techniques and discuss the ways in which MAS/LUCC models may overcome some important limitations of existing techniques. We briefly review ongoing MAS/LUCC modeling efforts in four research areas. We discuss the potential strengths of MAS/LUCC models and suggest that these strengths guide researchers in assessing the appropriate choice of model for their particular research question. We find that MAS/LUCC models are particularly well suited for representing complex spatial interactions under heterogeneous conditions and for modeling decentralized, autonomous decision making. We discuss a range of possible roles for MAS/LUCC models, from abstract models designed to derive stylized hypotheses to empirically detailed simulation models appropriate for scenario and policy analysis. We also discuss the challenge of validation and verification for MAS/LUCC models. Finally, we outline important challenges and open research questions in this new field. We conclude that, while significant challenges exist, these models offer a promising new tool for researchers whose goal is to create fine-scale models of LUCC phenomena that focus on human-environment interactions.

Deterrence or Escalation?: The Puzzle of Aggregate Studies of Repression and Dissent

Abstract: Aggregate data studies of domestic political conflict have used an Action-Reaction (AR) model that has produced contradictory findings about the repression/dissent nexus: Repression by regimes may either increase or decrease dissent by opposition groups. To clarify these findings I propose an alternative Rational Actor (RA) model from which are derived three propositions. (1) An increase in a government's repression of nonviolence will reduce the nonviolent activities of an opposition group but increase its violent activities. (2) The balance of effects, that is, whether an increase in the regime's repression increases or decreases the opposition group's total dissident activities, depends upon the government's accommodative policy to the group. (3) Consistent government accommodative and repressive policies reduce dissent; inconsistent policies increase dissent. The RA model thus accounts for the contradictory findings produced by the AR-based aggregate data studies of repression and dissent.

Economies of Scale in Multi-Output Production

Abstract: The concepts of economies and diseconomies of scale in production pervade much of economists' basic thinking about market structure and pricing. It is conventional wisdom that perfect competition can be viable only if firms' scale economies are exhausted at a level of output that is a small portion of the market. A monopoly firm allegedly minimizes industry costs and is stable against entry if economies of scale are important and unexhausted at the full extent of the market. Finally, it is supposed that a regulated or nationalized monopoly with scale economies must be permitted to price above marginal costs if its sales revenues are to cover its production costs. These standard insights rest on two rarely examined suppositions: (i) A firm with economies of scale cannot recover costs with marginal cost pricing; (ii) when the production technology exhibits scale economies over the full range of output, the least cost industry structure is monopoly. These suppositions are thought to follow from the standard definition: There are economies of scale if a small proportional increase in the levels of all input factors can lead to more than proportional increases in the levels of outputs produced.1 In this paper we find that both suppositions (i) and (ii) are, in general, false. The standard definition of scale economies fails to be a sufficient condition for the unprofitability of marginal cost pricing. While the presence of scale economies, as usually defined, does provide a necessary and sufficient condition for locally decreasing ray average cost, with more than one output this is neither necessary nor sufficient for monopoly to be the least cost production mode. Our focus, here, is the analysis of economies of scale in multioutput firms. We pose a new definition of the degree of scale economies S in terms of the multiproduct cost function. Given some familiar 1. See Debreu (1959), Lancaster (1968), Mansfield (1970), or Menger (1954), for example.

Consumers' Use of Nutritional Labels: A Review of Research Studies and Issues

Abstract: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Diet-related health problems have increased dramatically over the last few years. Consequently, nutritional labeling has emerged as an important aspect of consumers' food purchase decisions. Nutritional content in food products is considered to be a credence attribute. However, if trustworthy nutritional labels are available, nutritional labels could function as a search characteristic. The regulatory environment in some countries (e.g. USA, Australia etc.) has long recognized the potential of standardized on-pack nutrition information and has mandated the presence of nutritional labels on all processed food products. Others, like the EU, are contemplating similar mandatory nutritional labeling regulations. The nutritional labeling literature has grown significantly in recent years. Our paper reviews this increasingly important literature and addresses some specific issues regarding the determinants of label use, the debate on mandatory labeling, the label formats preferred by consumers, and the effect of nutrition label use on purchase and dietary behavior. Determinants of nutritional label use There has been no consistency in the results of studies conducted regarding the determinants of label use. For example, there has been no consensus on the effect of age, income, or working status on nutritional label use. However, education and gender (i.e., being female) have been found to positively affect label use. In addition, people with more available time for grocery shopping have been found to be more likely to be classified as label users. It also appears that consumers who are more concerned about nutrition and health are more likely to use nutritional labels. Consequently, consumers on a special diet, organic buyers, and those aware of the diet-disease relation are more likely to search for on-pack nutrition information than others. Type of household also has an effect on label use. Specifically, smaller households and households with young children are more likely to engage in nutrition information search behaviors. In addition, households in non-city or rural areas are more likely to use nutritional labels. Grocery shoppers but not meal planners are also more likely to engage in nutrition information search. Our review of the literature also suggests that consumers who attach importance to price usually are less likely to use labels but those who attach importance to nutrition are, as expected, more likely to search for nutritional information. Finally many studies have found that nutrition knowledge has a significant impact on nutritional label use. Mandatory vs. voluntary labeling From a firm's point of view, provision of nutritional information on food packages is desirable if it can generate more revenues. In the context of effective private quality signalling, government regulation would be unnecessary if higher quality products had nutritional information on their packages and those with lower quality did not. However, if sellers cannot signal quality effectively, the market may disappear completely or only the lowest quality products may be sold. Mandatory labeling is called to fill the void of information provision mainly by correcting asymmetric information or by correcting externality problems. However, prescriptions such as "more information is always better" may not be an optimal policy for nutrition labeling. One cannot therefore unambiguously state that the benefits of new nutrition labeling rules will be greater than the costs, although there is some reason to believe that benefits may be greater than the costs. The U.S.' Nutritional Labeling and Educational Act (NLEA) that went into effect in 1994 can serve as a good reference point for mandatory labeling. Some authors have found no significant change in the average nutritional quality of food products offered for sale by manufacturers and retailers after the implementation of the NLEA, thus suggesting that the benefits from information provision might be more limited than previously thought. …