Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/177100 
Year of Publication: 
2018
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers No. 11296
Publisher: 
Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn
Abstract: 
The Hicksian definition of complementarity and substitutability may not apply in contexts in which agents are not utility maximisers or where price or income variations, whether implicit or explicit, are not available. We look for tools to identify complementarity and substitutability satisfying the following criteria: they are behavioural (based only on observable choice data); model-free (valid whether the agent is rational or not); and they do not rely on price or income variation. We uncover a conflict between properties that it is arguably reasonable for a complementarity notion to possess. We discuss three different possible resolutions of the conflict.
Subjects: 
complements and substitutes
correlation
stochastic choice
JEL: 
D0
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
232.67 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.