Un argentino en Harvard ha publicado en SSRN un artículo con un modelo y un estudio empírico para calcular el volumen de las ganancias no monetarias que experimentamos cuando consumimos bienes que tienen la capacidad de “señalar” y de proporcionarnos la envidia, admiración de terceros o hacernos más atractivos
conspicuous consumption: i.e.people buy market goods (e.g. a Ferrari) to signal wealth and then increase the likelihood of obtaining some Non Monetary Gains (e.g. admiration)….a minority of personal donations are anonymous. More importantly, they show that for donation records of institutions that report the names of donators in donation categories (e.g. $1000-$1999, $2000-$2999), donations within each category are very close to the lower bound. This is clear evidence that people do not care only about donating money per-se, but also about what other people (e.g. former classmates) may infer from the donation that they observe. A second piece of evidence comes from Kuhn et al. (forthcoming), who exploits the Dutch Postcode Lottery (DPL) as a natural experiment. In that lottery a postal code (19 households on average) is randomly selected every week, and prizes are awarded to lottery participants living in that postal code. On average, this generates a temporary, unexpected income shock equal to about eight months of income for about one third of the households in a typical winning code, while leaving the incomes of nonwinning, neighboring households unaffected. They identify significant social effects in line with the conspicuous consumption theory: e.g. nonwinning households living in postcodes where a large number of households won the lottery are more likely to start a major exterior home renovation in the six months since the lottery than nonwinning households located elsewhere…Using nationally representative data on consumption in the US, our estimates suggest that for each dollar spent in clothing and cars the average household gets up to 50 cents of net benefits from Non Monetary Gains.A great part of life involves making choices between pecuniary and non-pecuniary outcomes. Deciding whether to move to a more developed country for a much better material standard of living, or staying near family and friends. Choosing between Law School or a life as a musician. Deciding between higher salaries in the private sector or the prestige of academia. The choice between a successful career or having children. Those choices are often extremely though, which suggests that the expected welfare in both sides of the equation are really close to each other. On the contrary, using market consumption as a measure of welfare would indicate that those are really simple choices, always in favor of more material well-being. By incorporating NMGs to the measure of welfare, we hope to obtain more accurate policy recommendations.
Esto puede tener significado en relación con los productos diferenciados ya que, seguramente, lo que los diferencia es, en alguna medida, el nivel de ganancias no monetarias que proporciona el consumo de una determinada marca en relación con otra. Por otro lado, resulta interesante que las donaciones no sean mayoritariamente anónimas. Al final no somos tan buenos cristianos: Mateo 6: 2-4
“Por eso, cuando andes haciendo dádivas de misericordia no toques trompeta delante de ti, así como hacen los hipócritas en las sinagogas y en las calles para que los hombres los glorifiquen. Les digo en verdad: Ellos ya disfrutan de su galardón completo. Mas tú, cuando hagas dádivas de misericordia, no sepa tu mano izquierda lo que hace tu derecha, para que tus dádivas de misericordia sean en secreto; entonces tu Padre que mira en secreto te lo pagará.”
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario