The Ubiquitous Giffen

Miller, Anne (2025): The Ubiquitous Giffen.

Abstract

This paper shows that a demand equation derived by adding two bounded leaning-S-shaped utilities includes the inferior-Giffen response.

A leaning-S-shaped, bounded cardinal utility, (0  u  1), for a single commodity is identified as a representation of the individual’s experience of fulfilment of a need – deprivation (increasing marginal utility (MU)), subsistence (a point of inflection), sufficiency (diminishing MU), and either satiation at finite consumption with the possibility of surfeit, or satiation at infinite consumption.

The separability rule states that utilities of commodities fulfilling the same need are weakly separable (multiplicative) and those of commodities fulfilling two different needs are strongly separable (additive).

Functional forms are derived from a utility function created by adding two normal distribution functions with satiation at infinity, the parameters of which have meaningful psychological interpretations. The indifference map, demand and Engels curve diagrams are explored.

Concave- and convex-to-the-origin indifference curves, (the former defining ‘dysfunctional poverty’, leading to disequilibrium in the derived functional forms), are separated by a straight-line indifference curve with slope defined by the relative-intensities-of-need.

Convex-to-the-origin indifference curves enable optimisation even for deprivation in one need. The boundaries between superior and inferior responses, and between inferior normal and inferior Giffen, are reflected in envelope curves in the derived functional form diagrams.

The inferior-Giffen experience occurs when an individual responds to a price increase for an abundant, cheaper good by consuming more of it, enabled by relinquishing some consumption of a more expensive commodity fulfilling a different need, of which s/he is already extremely deprived.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Bounded cardinal utility includes increasing marginal utility expressing deprivation; additive separability for different needs; dysfunctional poverty leads to involuntary unemployment and disequilibrium; envelope curves reflect inferior responses; the straight-line indifference curve determines the equilibrium price and survival endowments.
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C2 - Single Equation Models ; Single Variables > C21 - Cross-Sectional Models ; Spatial Models ; Treatment Effect Models ; Quantile Regressions; D - Microeconomics > D1 - Household Behavior and Family Economics > D11 - Consumer Economics: Theory

References

[17] Berg, Morten, “Giffen’s Paradox Revisited.” Bulletin of Economic Research, 39 (January 1987) 79 – 89.

[30] Biederman, Daniel K. “A strictly-concave, non-spliced, Giffen-compatible utility function”, Economic Letters, 131(C) (2015) 24 – 28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.03.024.

[20] Davies, John E. “Giffen Goods, the Survival Imperative, and the Irish Potato Culture”, Journal of Political Economy, 102(3) (June 1994) 547 – 65.

[13] Deaton, A and Muellbauer, J. Economics and Consumer Behaviour, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1980.

[18] Dougan, W.R. “Giffen Goods and the Law of Demand”, Journal of Political Economy, 90(4) (August 1982) 809 – 15.

[4] Doyal, Len and Gough, Ian A Theory of Human Need, Macmillan, London, 1991.

[12] Green, H.A.J. Consumer Theory, Macmillan, London, 1976.

[29] Haagsma, Rein “A Convenient Utility Function with Giffen Behaviour”, International Scholarly Research Network, (2012), Article ID 608645.

[9] Hagenaars, Aldi J.M. The Perception of Poverty, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1986.

[21] Hirschleifer, Jack Price Theory and Applications, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1976.

[27] Jensen, Robert T. and Miller, Nolan H. “Giffen behaviour and subsistence consumption”, The American Economic Review, 98(4) (2008) 1553 – 1577. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.98.4.1553.

[16] Johnson, Norman L. and Kotz, Samuel Continuous univariate distributions -1, Houghton Mifflin (Wiley), Boston, 1970.

[22] Kohli, Ulrich “Inverse Demand and Anti-Giffen Goods”, European Economic Review, 27(3) (April 1985) 397 – 404.

[1] Lawson, T. Economics and Reality, Routledge, London, 1997.

[14] Mallman, C.A., and Nudlar, Oscar, Human Development in its Social Context, Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1986.

[3] Maslow, Abraham H. “A Theory of Human Motivation”, Psychological Review, 50 (1943) 370 – 396. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

[15] Max-Neef, Manfred “Human-scale economics: the challenges ahead”, in Paul Ekins (ed), The Living Economy: a New Economics in the Making, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1986.

[6] Miller, A.G. “A Needs-Based Demand Theory.” In P Vanden Abeele (Ed), Proceedings of the thirteenth colloquium of the International Association for Research in Economic Psychology, Volume II, IAREP, Leuven, Autumn 1988.

[28] Moffatt, Peter G. “A Class of Indirect Utility Functions Predicting Giffen Behaviour.” In Heijman, Wim and von Mouche, Pierre (Eds), New Insights into the Theory of Giffen Goods, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2012, pp. 127 – 41.

[11] Mustonen, Seppo, SURVO: An Integrated Environment for Statistical Computing and Related Areas, Survo Systems Ltd, Helsinki, 1992.

[19] Silberberg, Eugene, and Walker, Donald A. “A Modern Analysis of Giffen’s Paradox”, International Economic Review, 25 (October 1984) 687 – 94.

[26] Sørensen, Peter N. “Simple Utility Functions with Giffen Demand”, Economic Theory, 31(2) (2007) 367 – 370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-006-0086-6

[23] Spiegel, Uriel “The Case of a Giffen Good”, Journal of Economic Education, 25 (Spring 1994) 137 – 47.

[24] Spiegel, Uriel “The Case of a Giffen Good: Reply”, Journal of Economic Education, 28(1) (Winter 1997) 45 – 47.

[31] Stonier, A.W., and Hague, D.C. A Textbook in Economic Theory. Longman, London, 1980.

[8] Van Herwaarden, Floor G., and Kapteyn, Arie “Empirical Comparison of the Shape of Welfare Functions”, European Economic Review, 15(3) (March 1981) 261 – 86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(81)80002-5.

[7] Van Praag, B.M.S. Individual Welfare Functions and Consumer Behaviour, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1968.

[10] Van Praag, B.M.S. and Kapteyn, A.J. “How sensible is the Leyden individual welfare function of income? A reply”, European Economic Review, 38(9) (December 1994) 1817 – 25. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(94)90052-3

[5] Ward, David and Lasen Marta “An Overview of Needs Theories behind Consumerism.” Journal of Applied Economic Sciences, 2009.

[25] Weber, Christian E. “The Case of a Giffen Good: Comment”, Journal of Economic Education, 28(1) (Winter 1997) 36 – 44.

[2] Yamamori, Toru “The concept of need in Adam Smith”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 41(2) (March 2017) 327 – 347. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bew049.