Skip to main content
Log in

Convergence in Revealed Preferences for Automobiles as Differentiated Goods: U.S. and OECD Countries: 1970–1999

  • Published:
Atlantic Economic Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Attributes of differentiated goods in personal consumption have both conceptual and policy importance in macroeconomic applications that include obsolescence rates of capital stock, the savings rate, and environmental issues. While there is both direct and indirect evidence of variation in preferences for these attributes across countries, there is also conjecture that recent global integration has reduced this variation. We examine convergence between the U.S. and four OECD countries in the levels of automobile attributes over the 1970–1999 period. Results of panel unit root tests with the U.S. as the comparison country showed convergence in the constructed measures of size, performance and efficiency. In pairwise comparisons between the U.S. and OECD countries, results of our model estimations indicated convergence in size and efficiency with estimated half lives to convergence of between four to six years. Disaggregating the definitional components of performance, results show convergence in horsepower when selected economic variables are controlled. We find that measures of trade, per capita income and price appear to be among the mechanisms through which increasing global integration relates to convergence. Directions for further study of convergence preferences for attribute profiles across countries are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I thank Frank Verboven, Penny Goldberg, the University of Leuven, and staff members of Katalog der Automobil Revue, and What Car? for providing access to unpublished data.

  2. Unpublished data for this series were generously provided by the OECD statistical directorate. Income, demographic and trade data were from the U.N. Statistical Yearbook, World Development Indicators and Business Statistics. I also thank the statistical division of the World Bank for supplementary data.

  3. I thank an anonymous reviewer for this and other insightful comments.

References

  • Berry, S., Levinsohn, J., & Pakes, A. (1995). Automobile prices in market equilibrium. Econometrica, 63, 841–890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordo, M., Taylor, A., & Williamson, J. (eds). (2003). Globalization in historical perspective. NBER Conference Report Series. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, I. (1996). Survey: living with the car. The Economist, (special section), June 22–28.

  • Cecchetti, S., Mark, N., & Sonora, R. (2002). Price level convergence among United States cities: lessons for the European central bank. International Economic Review, 43(4), 1081–1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, G., & Pesavento, E. (2006). On the failure of purchasing power parity for bilateral exchange rates after 1973. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 38, 1405–1430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, G., & Ellison, S. (2005). Lessons about markets from the internet. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. (1998). Market efficiency, long-term returns and behavioral finance. Journal of Financial Economy, 49, 283–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fauvel, Y., & Samson, L. (1991). Intertemporal substitution on durable goods: an empirical analysis. Canadian Journal of Economics, 23, 192–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, P., & Verboven, F. (2001). The evolution of price dispersion in the European car Market. Review of Economic Studies, 811–848.

  • Goldberg, P., & Verboven, F. (2005). Market integration and convergence to the law of one price: Evidence from the European car market. Journal of International Economics, 49–73.

  • Haskel, J., & Wolf, H. (2001). Why does the law of one price fail?—A case study. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 103, 545–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hortaçsu, A., & Syverson, C. (2004). Product differentiation, search costs and competition in the mutual fund industry: a case study of S&P 500 index funds. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119, 403–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Im, K., Pasaran, M., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogenous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115, 53–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Monetary Fund (2005). Directory of trade statistics yearbook, Washington, DC.

  • Ireland, N. (1994). On limiting the market for status signals. Journal of Public Economics, 53, 91–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, T. (1983). The globalization of the markets. Harvard Business Review, 3, 92–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenberg, J. (1996). Consuming because other consumers consume. Social Theory and Practice, 22, 273–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, M. (2004). Pricing in segmented markets, arbitrage barriers, and the law of one price: evidence from the European car market. Review of International Economics, 12(3), 456–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markusan, J. (1995). The boundaries of multi national enterprises and the theory of international trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9, 169–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Princen, T. (1999). Consumption and environment: same conceptual issues. Ecological Economics, 31, 347–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silver, S. (2002). Status through consumption. Boston and Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slesnick, D. (1992). Aggregate consumption and the savings rate in the postwar United States. Review of Economics and Statistics, 74, 585–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uroma, K., & Hodge, I. (2005). Are stated preferences convergent with revealed preferences? Empirical evidence from Nigeria. Ecological Economics, 59, 24–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waters, M. (1995). Globalization. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendner, R. (2005). Frames of reference, the environment and efficient taxation. Economics of Governance, 6, 13–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, P., & Zeng, M. (2004). Strategies for competing in a changed China. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45, 85–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, D. (1998). An endogenous growth model with expanding ranges of consumer goods and producer durables. International Economic Review, 39, 439–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I thank the Donald and Sally Lucas Foundation for its generous support of data purchases, data collection from print sources and data entry. I also thank Rahul Jain for capable research assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven D. Silver.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Silver, S.D. Convergence in Revealed Preferences for Automobiles as Differentiated Goods: U.S. and OECD Countries: 1970–1999. Atl Econ J 38, 3–14 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11293-009-9199-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11293-009-9199-1

Keywords

JEL

Navigation