Hedonism vs. Nihilism: No Arbitrage and Tests of Urban Economic Models
Marcus Berliant () and
Daniel McMillen ()
Urban/Regional from EconWPA
We present two notions of “no arbitrage” in urban economic models and show that there is no model satisfying both. The standard hedonic housing model of urban economics and its generalizations are consistent with the first of these, but inconsistent with the second. We present a model consistent with the second notion of “no arbitrage” and a continuum of models consistent with neither notion that are observationally equivalent to the standard model, even if the utility function of consumers is known. Only one of these is the standard model. Thus, the available tests of the standard model cannot provide much evidence of its validity. Finally, we examine nonlinear price systems consistent with the second notion of "no arbitrage" and their welfare consequences.
Keywords: Monocentric City; Hedonic Models; No Arbitrage (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: R21 R13 D41 C21 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-geo, nep-mic and nep-ure
Date: 2004-07-29, Revised 2005-02-16
Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 19
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Journal Article: Hedonism vs. nihilism: No arbitrage and tests of urban economic models (2006)
Working Paper: Hedonism vs. Hihilism: No Arbitrage and Tests of Urban Economic Models (2003)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wpa:wuwpur:0407012
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Urban/Regional from EconWPA
Series data maintained by EconWPA ().