Book•
Intermediate microeconomics : A modern approach
01 Jan 2006-
TL;DR: The Varian approach as mentioned in this paper gives students tools they can use on exams, in the rest of their classes, and in their careers after graduation, and is still the most modern presentation of the subject.
Abstract: This best-selling text is still the most modern presentation of the subject. The Varian approach gives students tools they can use on exams, in the rest of their classes, and in their careers after graduation.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors trace institutional change in the US electric power industry over a 40-year period and find that when the institutional environment is stable, incumbent organizational forms and embedded logics present formidable obstacles to entrepreneurial activity.
320 citations
Cites background from "Intermediate microeconomics : A mod..."
...…in the late 1800s and differentiated certain industries from others, claiming that some economic norms (competition) did not apply to certain industries, such as the railroads and water, because large fixed costs and small marginal costs made competition impossible (Varian, 1996; Primeaux, 1986)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the implications of the EU Biofuels Directive (BFD) using a computable general equilibrium framework with endogenous land supply were assessed using a tractable linear model.
Abstract: This article assesses the implications of the EU Biofuels Directive (BFD) using a computable general equilibrium framework with endogenous land supply. The results show that, without policy intervention to stimulate the use of biofuel crops, the targets of the BFD will not be met. With the BFD, the enhanced demand for biofuel crops has a strong impact on agriculture globally and within Europe, leading to an increase in land use. On the other hand, the long-term declining trend in real agricultural prices may slow down or even reverse.
309 citations
01 Oct 2008
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of transit use in 265 US urbanized areas, and tested dozens of variables measuring regional geography, metropolitan economy, population characteristics, auto/highway system characteristics, and transit system characteristics.
Abstract: Public subsidy of transit services has increased dramatically in recent years, with little effect on overall ridership. Quite obviously, a clear understanding of the factors influencing transit ridership is central to decisions on investments in and the pricing and deployment of transit services. Yet the literature about the causes of transit use is quite spotty; most previous aggregate analyses of transit ridership have examined just one or a few systems, have not included many of the external, control variables thought to influence transit use, and have not addressed the simultaneous relationship between transit service supply and consumption. This study addresses each of these shortcomings by (1) conducting a cross-sectional analysis of transit use in 265 US urbanized areas, (2) testing dozens of variables measuring regional geography, metropolitan economy, population characteristics, auto/highway system characteristics, and transit system characteristics, and (3) constructing two-stage simultaneous equation regression models to account for simultaneity between transit service supply and consumption. We find that most of the variation in transit ridership among urbanized areas – in both absolute and relative terms – can be explained by factors outside of the control of public transit systems: (1) regional geography (specifically, area of urbanization, population, population density, and regional location in the US), (2) metropolitan economy (specifically, personal/household income), (3) population characteristics (specifically, the percent college students, recent immigrants, and Democratic voters in the population), and (4) auto/highway system characteristics (specifically, the percent carless households and nontransit/non-SOV trips, including commuting via carpools, walking, biking, etc.). While these external factors clearly go a long way toward determining the overall level of transit use in an urbanized area, we find that transit policies do make a significant difference. The observed range in both fares and service frequency in our sample could account for at least a doubling (or halving) of transit use in a given urbanized area. Controlling for the fact that public transit use is strongly correlated with urbanized area size, about 26% of the observed variance in per capita transit patronage across US urbanized areas is explained in the models presented here by service frequency and fare levels. The observed influence of these two factors is consistent with both the literature and intuition: frequent service draws passengers, and high fares drive them away.
292 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of transit use in 265 US urbanized areas, and tested dozens of variables measuring regional geography, metropolitan economy, population characteristics, auto/highway system characteristics, and transit system characteristics.
Abstract: Public subsidy of transit services has increased dramatically in recent years, with little effect on overall ridership. Quite obviously, a clear understanding of the factors influencing transit ridership is central to decisions on investments in and the pricing and deployment of transit services. Yet the literature about the causes of transit use is quite spotty; most previous aggregate analyses of transit ridership have examined just one or a few systems, have not included many of the external, control variables thought to influence transit use, and have not addressed the simultaneous relationship between transit service supply and consumption. This study addresses each of these shortcomings by (1) conducting a cross-sectional analysis of transit use in 265 US urbanized areas, (2) testing dozens of variables measuring regional geography, metropolitan economy, population characteristics, auto/highway system characteristics, and transit system characteristics, and (3) constructing two-stage simultaneous equation regression models to account for simultaneity between transit service supply and consumption. We find that most of the variation in transit ridership among urbanized areas – in both absolute and relative terms – can be explained by factors outside of the control of public transit systems: (1) regional geography (specifically, area of urbanization, population, population density, and regional location in the US), (2) metropolitan economy (specifically, personal/household income), (3) population characteristics (specifically, the percent college students, recent immigrants, and Democratic voters in the population), and (4) auto/highway system characteristics (specifically, the percent carless households and nontransit/non-SOV trips, including commuting via carpools, walking, biking, etc.). While these external factors clearly go a long way toward determining the overall level of transit use in an urbanized area, we find that transit policies do make a significant difference. The observed range in both fares and service frequency in our sample could account for at least a doubling (or halving) of transit use in a given urbanized area. Controlling for the fact that public transit use is strongly correlated with urbanized area size, about 26% of the observed variance in per capita transit patronage across US urbanized areas is explained in the models presented here by service frequency and fare levels. The observed influence of these two factors is consistent with both the literature and intuition: frequent service draws passengers, and high fares drive them away.
283 citations
Cites background from "Intermediate microeconomics : A mod..."
...As long as the cost of consuming a good is lower than an individual’s willingness to pay, the good is consumed (Dawson, 1983; Varian, 1990 )....
[...]
...Basic economic theory tells us that the actual consumption of goods is determined by the equilibrium point between the demand and supply curves under free market conditions (Dawson, 1983; Varian, 1990 )....
[...]
TL;DR: A second Industrious Revolution? Appendix I.1. The transformation of consumer desire in the long eighteenth century 2. The origins of the Industrious revolution 3. The Industrial Revolution: the supply of labor 4. The industrial revolution: consumer demand 5. The breadwinner-homemaker household 6.
Abstract: 1. The transformation of consumer desire in the long eighteenth century 2. The origins of the Industrious Revolution 3. The Industrious Revolution: the supply of labor 4. The Industrious Revolution: consumer demand 5. The breadwinner-homemaker household 6. A second Industrious Revolution? Appendix I.
267 citations