Advertisement

Economic Theory

, Volume 52, Issue 2, pp 461–500 | Cite as

Price dynamics in an exchange economy

  • Steven Gjerstad
Research Article

Abstract

The pure exchange model is the foundation of the neoclassical theory of value, yet equilibrium predictions and price adjustment dynamics for this model remained untested prior to the experiment reported in this paper. With the exchange economy replicated several times, prices and allocations in most experiment sessions adjust toward the competitive equilibrium in continuous double auction trading, though adjustment is much slower than in previous commodity flow (or perishable good) double auction market experiments. Price adjustment is evaluated by comparing its extent within each market replication (or trading period) to its extent across trading periods. More price adjustment occurs within trading periods than across trading periods, so price adjustment data are evaluated with the disequilibrium Hahn process model (Hahn and Negishi in Econometrica 30:463–469, 1962) of within-period trades. This paper introduces a stochastic version the Hahn process model and demonstrates that a linear approximation to this stochastic model yields an autoregressive process with a near unit root when the adjustment rate is low. In effect, the autoregressive price adjustment model studied extensively by time series econometricians over the past 30 years can be viewed as a reduced form of a stochastic disequilibrium exchange economy price adjustment model. Estimation of the model demonstrates that price adjustment in the exchange economy experiment is considerably slower than in economies without income effects, which suggests that the price discovery process may be a significant factor in the slow adjustment documented by applied econometricians.

Keywords

Competitive equilibrium Disequilibrium dynamics Continuous double auction Experimental economics Exchange economy Hahn process Tatonnement Time series Unit root tests 

JEL Classification

C22 C92 D41 D44 D51 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

199_2011_651_MOESM1_ESM.nb (38 kb)
ESM 1 (NB 38 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM2_ESM.nb (67 kb)
ESM 2 (NB 67 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM3_ESM.nb (23 kb)
ESM 3 (NB 23 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM4_ESM.nb (25 kb)
ESM 4 (NB 26 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM5_ESM.nb (37 kb)
ESM 5 (NB 38 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM6_ESM.m (8 kb)
ESM 6 (M 9 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM7_ESM.m (31 kb)
ESM 7 (M 31 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM8_ESM.m (3 kb)
ESM 8 (M 3 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM9_ESM.m (3 kb)
ESM 9 (M 3 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM10_ESM.m (6 kb)
ESM 10 (M 7 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM11_ESM.m (8 kb)
ESM 11 (M 9 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM12_ESM.m (5 kb)
ESM 12 (M 6 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM13_ESM.m (3 kb)
ESM 13 (M 3 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM14_ESM.m (16 kb)
ESM 14 (M 16 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM15_ESM.txt (5 kb)
ESM 15 (TXT 5 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM16_ESM.m (66 kb)
ESM 16 (M 394 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM17_ESM.txt (2 kb)
ESM 17 (TXT 66 kb)
199_2011_651_MOESM18_ESM.pdf (1.1 mb)
ESM 18 (PDF 2 kb)

References

  1. Anderson C.M., Plott C.R., Shimomura K.-I., Granat S.: Global instability in experimental general equilibrium: the scarf example. J Econ Theory 115, 209–249 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arrow K.J., Hahn F.: General Competitive Analysis. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1971)Google Scholar
  3. Arrow K.J., Hurwicz L.: On the stability of the competitive equilibrium, I. Econometrica 26, 522–552 (1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arrow K.J., Block H.D., Hurwicz L.: On the stability of the competitive equilibrium, II. Econometrica 27, 82–109 (1959)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azariadis C., Kaas L.: Is dynamic general equilibrium a theory of everything?. Econ Theory 32, 13–41 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barsky R.B., De Long J.B.: Why does the stock market fluctuate?. Q J Econ 108, 291–311 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cox J.S.: On testing the utility hypothesis. Econ J 107, 1054–1078 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davidson R., MacKinnon J.G.: Estimation and Inference in Econometrics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1993)Google Scholar
  9. Davidson D., Suppes P., Siegel S.: Decision Making: An Experimental Approach. Stanford University Press, Stanford (1957)Google Scholar
  10. Dickey D.A., Fuller W.A.: Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. J Am Stat Assoc 74, 427–431 (1979)Google Scholar
  11. Easley D., Ledyard J.O.: Theories of price formation and exchange in double oral auctions. In: Friedman, D., Rust, J. (eds) The Double Auction Market: Institutions, Theories, and Evidence, pp. 63–97. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1993)Google Scholar
  12. Elliott G., Rothenberg T.J., Stock J.H.: Efficient tests for an autoregressive unit root. Econometrica 64, 813–836 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Enders W.: Applied Econometric Time Series. Wiley, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  14. Friedman D.: A simple testable model of price formation in the double auction market. J Econ Behav Organ 15, 47–70 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gjerstad S.: The competitive market paradox. J Econ Dyn Control 31, 1753–1780 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gjerstad S., Dickhaut J.: Price formation in double auctions. Games Econ Behav 22, 1–29 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gjerstad, S., Shachat, J.: Individual Rationality and Market Efficiency. Purdue University Economics Department, Working Paper 1204 (2007)Google Scholar
  18. Hahn F.H., Negishi T.: A theorem on non-tatonnement stability. Econometrica 30, 463–469 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lian P., Plott C.R.: General equilibrium, markets, macroeconomics and money in a laboratory experimental environment. Econ Theory 12, 21–75 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lothian J.R., Taylor M.P.: Real exchange rate behavior: the recent float from the perspective of the past two centuries. J Polit Econ 104, 488–509 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rogoff K.: The purchasing power parity puzzle. J Econ Lit 34, 647–668 (1996)Google Scholar
  22. Scarf H.: Some examples of global instability of the competitive equilibrium. Int Econ Rev 1, 157–172 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith V.L.: An experimental study of competitive market behavior. J Polit Econ LXX, 111–137 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smith V.L.: Experimental economics: induced value theory. Am Econ Rev 66, 274–279 (1976)Google Scholar
  25. Smith V.L.: Microeconomic systems as an experimental science. Am Econ Rev 72, 923–955 (1982)Google Scholar
  26. Taylor A.M.: Potential pitfalls for the purchasing-power-parity puzzle? sampling and specification biases in mean-reversion tests of the law of one price. Econometrica 69, 473–498 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Taylor A.M., Taylor M.P.: The purchasing power parity debate. J Econ Perspect 18, 135–158 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Walras L.: Elements of Pure Economics. Translated by William Jaffé. R.D. Irwin, Homewood (1874)Google Scholar
  29. Williams, A.W., Smith, V.L., Ledyard, J.O., Gjerstad, S.: Concurrent trading in two experimental markets with demand interdependence. Econ Theory 16, 511–528 (2000). Reprinted in Studies in Economic Theory: Advances in Experimental Markets, Springer, 2001Google Scholar
  30. Wilson R.B.: On equilibria of bid-ask markets. In: Feiwel, G.W. (eds) Arrow and the ascent of modern economic theory, pp. 375–414. New York University Press, New York (1987)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Economic Science InstituteChapman UniversityOrangeUSA

Personalised recommendations