Is the Mexico City metro an inferior good

Time series cointegration techniques are used to estimate whether the Mexico City metro is perceived as a normal or inferior good. Owing to the fact that the Mexico City metro mainly serves the low income sectors of the population, this paper attempts to separate the overall income effect into two uncorrelated components: a vehicle stock effect (used as a proxy for medium/high income) and minimum wage effect net of the influence of vehicle stock (used as a proxy for low income). The time series cointegration results show that minimum wage elasticities are positive whilst vehicle stock elasticities are negative. These results suggest that for the majority of metro users, whose salaries are based on low multiples of the minimum wage and are not potential car owners, the Mexico City metro is perceived as a normal good. However, for middle/high income earners, who can afford to buy a private vehicle when their incomes increase, the Mexico City metro is perceived as an inferior good.

[1]  Pentti Saikkonen,et al.  Asymptotically Efficient Estimation of Cointegration Regressions , 1991, Econometric Theory.

[2]  P. Phillips,et al.  Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root: How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root? , 1992 .

[3]  David F. Hendry,et al.  Co-Integration, Error Correction, and the Econometric Analysis of Non-Stationary Data , 1993, Advanced texts in econometrics.

[4]  D. Hendry,et al.  Exploring Equilibrium Relationships in Econometrics through Static Models: Some Monte-Carlo Evidence , 2009 .

[5]  Clifford J. Wirth,et al.  Transportation Policy in Mexico City , 1997 .

[6]  J. Preston,et al.  The demand for public transport: The effects of fares, quality of service, income and car ownership , 2006 .

[7]  Chris Chatfield,et al.  Introduction to Statistical Time Series. , 1976 .

[8]  Kenneth Train,et al.  Customers' Choice Among Retail Energy Suppliers: The Willingness-to-Pay for Service Attributes , 2000 .

[9]  P. Schmidt,et al.  Extended tabulations for Dickey-Fuller tests , 1989 .

[10]  J. Stock,et al.  Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root , 1992 .

[11]  Willy W. Cortez.  What is Behind Increasing Wage Inequality in Mexico , 2001 .

[12]  Mark Wardman,et al.  DEVELOPING NATIONAL MULTI-MODAL TRAVEL MODELS: A CASE STUDY OF THE JOURNEY TO WORK , 2001 .

[13]  David F. Hendry,et al.  Explaining Cointegration Analysis: Part II , 2000 .

[14]  C. Granger,et al.  Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation and testing , 1987 .

[15]  Joyce Dargay,et al.  The demand for local bus services in England , 2002 .

[16]  T. Litman.  Transit Price Elasticities and Cross-Elasticities , 2004 .

[17]  F. FitzRoy,et al.  Public transport demand in Freiburg: why did patronage double in a decade? , 1998 .

[18]  A. Cameron,et al.  Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications , 2005 .

[19]  SPATIAL INEQUALITIES IN THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN LATIN AMERICAN CITIES , 1993 .

[20]  Alain Pirotte,et al.  THE MAIN DETERMINANTS OF THE DEMAND FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ENGLAND AND FRANCE USING SHRINKAGE ESTIMATORS , 2003 .

[21]  James G. MacKinnon,et al.  Critical Values for Cointegration Tests , 1990 .

[22]  Peter Romilly,et al.  Subsidy and Local Bus Service Deregulation in Britain: A Re-evaluation , 2001 .

[23]  Paul Schimek,et al.  Automobile and Public Transit Use in the United States and Canada: Comparison of Postwar Trends , 1996 .

[24]  David Fairris,et al.  Minimum Wages and the Wage Structure in Mexico , 2008 .

[25]  Peter C. B. Phillips,et al.  Statistical Inference in Instrumental Variables Regression with I(1) Processes , 1990 .