All of samaramendez's Comments + Replies

Thanks for weighing in!

I read your comment to mean that you skimmed the butter and margarine studies that we considered in our brief analysis, but please correct me if I misunderstood.

Yes, I agree that there is very little consideration for price endogeneity in the butter and margarine studies that we found. I could have made that more clear in our report. I suppose that oversight is due to the studies generally skewing older and using older methods. One of the meta-analyses we reviewed (Auer and Papies, 2020) included price endogeneity in their analysis, ... (read more)

3
Joseph Richardson
1y
Thank you for the reply. Indeed, I was referring to the studies engaging with butter-margarine substitution. However, I think it definitely needs emphasising just how weak those studies are and thus that they cannot be trusted to make any policy decisions. Additionally, while relevant, I would not want to use Auer and Papies (2020) as a basis for policy decisions either, as it is quite unclear how comparable those estimates are due to them pooling across a wide range of markets potentially quite different to this one (is the degree of product differentiation the same? groceries could be different to pharmaceuticals or durables). Finally, there is also the issue the papers they synthesise using instruments might not use good ones, but I do not have the time to check that. 

I would be happy to speak with your further, especially to further the cause of getting more economists/social scientists hired! I'll send you a PM.

Thanks for sharing this article and opening this discussion.

I'm also interested in hearing the general survey replies to understand what specifics the movement as a whole is looking for.

Anecdotally, I'm the economist at The Humane League Labs, and I tend to get a broad range of questions about cost-benefit analysis, consumer preferences (and how to change them), market structures, impact analysis, etc. What I actually work on tends to be causal inference, which is a place where economists' skills could be very helpful for the movement.

I have my PhD, and I know that my education level plus my resear... (read more)

2
lauren_mee
5y
😊 well Thankyou very much for your response and video. I’d love to speak more with you about this actually and your experience of how your skills have been and good be beneficial to get a better understanding. As said above unfortunately this was just to understand priority skill gaps so then we can do a deeper dive. Also anecdotally I’m not sure all organisations would know in detail how someone with your credentials could help them to their full extent. I would be really interested in speaking to you further if you wouldn’t mind.

It's great to see the magnitude of the change, and it will be interesting to see how it moves as the main cage-free commitment deadlines get closer.

Thanks for your comment! It's not much of a comment-generating piece, although I do hope that people might use the data for other projects. I am always excited to see data publicized here as well.

That's right, I remember that result in Veganomics as well. Looks like I need to revisit the literature.

The wealth relationship is very interesting here, not what I would have expected. I would be interested to see if the same relationships hold over different countries with different income distributions.

Thanks for sharing!

3
zdgroff
5y
The wealth thing matches other data I've seen. I think Veganomics mentioned that. Not sure where else I've seen it but I think the result is fairly robust.

Sure, I didn't discuss the connection between your demand decrease and the remaining people's elasticities. Let's use Brian's example of the supermarket supply system to illustrate that connection.

When you stop buying chicken, demand in the store has decreased. Perhaps it decreases to the point where the store decides to put the chicken on sale. Other shoppers who still buy meat will see the sale price and change their purchases according to their price elasicities, which are defined as the percent change in quantity demanded given a 1%... (read more)

Thanks for the clarification, I understand your question now. You're asking about estimating the size of a demand shift that results from one economic agent leaving the market, as opposed to an elasticity. I believe we're asking the same question; with elasticities, I want to investigate the underlying mechanism that takes us from your leaving the market to a shift in the demand curve. Whereas you would like to know the end result only.

The answer to this question (the effect on aggregate demand of one person leaving the market) may be difficult t... (read more)

1
Eli Rose
5y
I like the idea of using food scares as a proxy! Very cool. It sounds like you are saying that knowing "how will kg of chicken sold change given change in price" will let you answer "how will kg of chicken sold change given me not buying chicken." I don't see quite how to do this, could you give me a pointer? (for concreteness, what does the paper's estimate of elasticity of poultry at 0.68 mean for "kg of chicken sold given I don't buy the chicken") Perhaps more importantly, it sounds like you might disagree that one person abstaining from eating chicken has a meaningful impact on the number of chickens raised + killed. If so I'm quite interested, as this is something I have become convinced against by sources like https://reducing-suffering.org/does-vegetarianism-make-a-difference/. My current model is that if I buy the meat of one chicken at a supermarket, that *in expectation* causes about one chicken to be raised + killed.

Many great points already about how to respond to your friend. I'd like to expand a bit on a few.

  • Shaybenmosche mentions the connection between two markets that illustrates interesting subtleties. Yes, you leaving the market reduces demand for meat and likely lowers the price which may in turn increase demand for the remaining people in the market. But you entering the market for meat alternatives increases demand and price there, which will drive producers to innovate and/or enter the alternatives market.
  • Cole points out that a shift of the demand cur
... (read more)
2
Eli Rose
5y
Thanks, Samara. I found the paper you're talking about here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2804646/pdf/216.pdf I'm out of my depth here, but it looks like the paper is answering the question: "if the price of chicken changes from $X/kg to $(X + Y)/kg, how will kg of chicken sold change?" While the question I'm asking is "if I don't buy chicken, how will kg of chicken sold change?".

I just had a very quick look-through of Y&G, but it looks like they tested for curvilinear (i.e., a log transformation of GDP) only. I could be missing a footnote, but I don't believe they included a second-order GDP term to test a polynomial relationship.

However, the findings of the 2013 paper largely support that, from my quick reading. The estimation of the second-order coefficient is significant but basically zero for most of the different data slices. Further, when they back out the inflection points, the income levels for the turning point ... (read more)

Thanks for posting this update. I'm fairly new to the forum, so I missed the original posting of the two links you've provided.

These posts seem closely related to meat consumption Kuznets curves. I am not an expert in this literature and I intend to do more reading on the topic, but a quick search found this 2013 paper, which might be of interest to you. I've only briefly looked over the paper, but their results seem to update and support the findings of York and Gossard (2004). It seems that the expected turning point of the meat consumptio... (read more)

2
kbog
5y
Interesting. Y&G said that they checked for a curvillinear relationship and the results "do not suggest substantively different conclusions," which I understand to mean that there isn't good evidence for a Kuznets curve. I did not know that India's average consumption was so low, perhaps their marginal increase in consumption is not much either. Looking at Table 3. Am I reading this right: the relationship for low income countries is +0.0188kg (annually) per $1 annual income? That's 18.8kg from $1000 which is about an order of magnitude greater than the Y&G results.