Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2020, 68(4), 797-806 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun202068040797

Consumption Function in the Context of Cultural Affinity Zones

Terézia Vančová, Luboš Střelec
Department of Statistics and Operational Analysis, Faculty of Business and Economics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic

Consumers' purchasing behaviour is affected at the microeconomic level by personal, psychological, situational, social and cultural factors. Beside the political and economic factors, culture with its beliefs, values, attitudes and traditions plays a substantial role also at the macroeconomic level in affecting national aggregate consumption, despite the recent phenomenon of globalisation. There is an evidence of excess sensitivity in European countries, which confirms that income change is a good predictor of consumption change. Clusters of European countries constructed according to single consumption functions correspond to some extent to the cultural affinity zones. Reactions (marginal propensity to consume) vary among formed groups of European countries and average consumption response is the highest in wealthier Western, followed by Central Europe and is the lowest in the South Europe. The results of this paper suggest that a stabilization policy may be more effective in an individualistic, hedonistic, rather a decentralised culture.

Keywords: consumption expenditure, cultural dimensions, disposable income, excess sensitivity of consumption, panel data models
Grants and funding:

Supported by grant No PEF_DP_2020030 of the Grant Agency IGA PEF MENDELU.

Received: March 30, 2020; Accepted: June 29, 2020; Published: August 30, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Vančová, T., & Střelec, L. (2020). Consumption Function in the Context of Cultural Affinity Zones. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis68(4), 797-806. doi: 10.11118/actaun202068040797
Download citation

References

  1. ALDEN, D. L., STEENKAMP, J. and BATRA, R. 1999. Brand positioning through advertising in Asia, North America, and Europe: the role of global consumer culture. Journal of Marketing, 63(1): 75-87. DOI: 10.1177/002224299906300106 Go to original source...
  2. BRODA, C. and PARKER, J. A. 2014. The Economic Stimulus Payments of 2008 and the Aggregate Demand for Consumption. Journal of Monetary Economics, 68(S): 20-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2014.09.002 Go to original source...
  3. CAMPBELL, J. Y. and DEATON, A. 1989. Why Is Consumption So Smooth? Review of Economic Studies, 56(3): 357-374. DOI: 10.2307/2297552 Go to original source...
  4. CAMPBELL, J. Y. and MANKIW, N. G. 1989. Consumption, Income, and Interest Rates: Reinterpreting the Time Series Evidence. In: NBER Macroeconomics Annual. Volume 4. National Bureau of Economic Research, pp. 185-246. Go to original source...
  5. CARROLL, C. D. 1997. Buffer-stock Saving and the Life Cycle/Permanent Income Hypothesis. Quarterly journal of economics, 112(1): 1-55. DOI: 10.1162/003355397555109 Go to original source...
  6. CLEVELAND, M. and BARTSCH, F. 2019. Global consumer culture: epistemology and ontology. International Marketing Review, 36(4): 556-580. DOI: 10.1108/IMR-10-2018-0287 Go to original source...
  7. DE MOOIJ, M. 2003. Convergence and divergence in consumer behavior: Implications for global advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 22(2): 183-202. DOI: 10.1080/02650487.2003.11072848 Go to original source...
  8. DE MOOIJ, M. 2019. Fairy tales of global consumer culture in a polarizing world. International Marketing Review, 36(4): 581-586. DOI: 10.1108/IMR-11-2018-0314 Go to original source...
  9. DE MOOIJ, M. and HOFSTEDE, G. 2011. Cross-Cultural Consumer Behavior: A Review of Research Findings. International Journal of Advertising, 23(3-4): 181-192.
  10. DEATON, A. S. 1987. Life-Cycle Models of Consumption: Is the Evidence Consistent with the Theory? In: Advances in Econometrics. Fifth World Congress. Vol. II. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 121-148. Go to original source...
  11. DEATON, A. S. 1992. Understanding Consumption. 1st Edition. New York: Oxford University Press. Go to original source...
  12. EINIAN, M. and NILI, M. 2020. Excess sensitivity and borrowing constraints: Evidence from Iranian households. Econ. Transit. Institut. Change, 28(1): 137-160. DOI: 10.1111/ecot.12233 Go to original source...
  13. EUROSTAT. 2019. GDP and main components (output, expenditure and income). Eurostat. [Online]. Available at: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=nama_10_gdp〈=en [Accessed: 2019, July 14].
  14. EUROSTAT. 2019. GDP and main components (output, expenditure and income).Eurostat. [Online]. Available at: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=namq_10_gdp〈=en [Accessed: 2019, July 13].
  15. EUROSTAT. 2019. Final consumption aggregates. Eurostat. [Online]. Available at: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=namq_10_fcs〈=en [Accessed: 2019, July 13].
  16. EUROSTAT. 2019. Population on 1 January by age and sex. Eurostat. [Online]. Available at: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=demo_pjan〈=en [Accessed: 2019, July 14].
  17. FLAVIN, M. 1981. The Adjustment of Consumption to Changing Expectations about Future Income. Journal of Political Economy, 89(5): 974-1009. DOI: 10.1086/261016 Go to original source...
  18. FRIEDMAN, M. 1957. A Theory of the Consumption Function. 1st Edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  19. GOURINCHAS, P.-O. and PARKER, J. A. 2002. Consumption over the Life Cycle. Econometrica, 70(1): 47-89. DOI: 10.1111/1468-0262.00269 Go to original source...
  20. HALL, R. E. 1978. Stochastic Implications of the Life Cycle-Permanent Income Hypothesis: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Political Economy, 86(6): 971-987. DOI: 10.1086/260724 Go to original source...
  21. HENDRY, D. 1995. Dynamic Econometrics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Go to original source...
  22. HOFSTEDE, G. 2019. Country Comparison. Hofstede Insights. [Online]. Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/ [Accessed: 2019, September 05].
  23. HOFSTEDE, G. 2001. Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  24. HOFSTEDE, G. 2011. Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1): 8. DOI: 10.9707/2307-0919.1014 Go to original source...
  25. HOFSTEDE, G., HOFSTEDE, G. J. and MINKOV, M. 2010. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. 3rd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
  26. INKELES, A. and LEVINSON D. J. 1969. National character: The study of modal personality and sociocultural systems. The Handbook of Social Psychology, 4: 418-506.
  27. JAPPELLI, T. and PISTAFERRI, L. 2011. The Consumption Response to Income Changes. Annual Review of Economics, 2(1): 479-506. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.economics.050708.142933 Go to original source...
  28. KALE, S. 1995. Grouping Euroconsumers: A Culture-Based Clustering Approach. Journal of International Marketing, 3(3): 35-48. DOI: 10.1177/1069031X9500300304 Go to original source...
  29. KAPLAN, G. and VIOLANTE, G. L. 2010. How much Consumption Insurance beyond Self-insurance? American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 2(4): 53-87. Go to original source...
  30. KAPLAN, G. and VIOLANTE, G. L. 2014. A Model of the Consumption Response to Fiscal Stimulus Payments. Econometrica, 82(4): 1199-1239. Go to original source...
  31. KEYNES, J. M. 1936. The general theory of employment, interest, and money. Palgrave Macmillan.
  32. KLUCKHOHN, C. K. 1951. Values and value orientations in the theory of action. In: PARSONS, T. and SHILS, E. A. (Eds.). Toward a general theory of action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  33. KUENG, L. 2018. Excess Sensitivity of High-Income Consumers. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(4): 1693-1751. DOI: 10.1093/qje/qjy014 Go to original source...
  34. LEVITT, T. 1983. The globalization of markets. Harvard Business Review, 83(3): 92-102.
  35. LIAN, C. 2019. Consumption with Imperfect Perception of Wealth. Working paper. Economics MIT.
  36. MODIGLIANI, F. and BRUMBERG, R. 1954. Utility analysis and the consumption function: an interpretation of cross-section data. In: KURIHARA, K. K. (Ed.). Post-Keynesians Economics. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, pp. 388-436.
  37. PARKER, J. 2017. Why Don't Households Smooth Consumption? Evidence from a 25 Million Dollar Experiment. NBER Working Paper, No. 21369. NBER. Go to original source...
  38. SCHÜTTE, H. and CIARLANTE, D. 1998. Consumer Behaviour in Asia. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. Go to original source...
  39. SUH, T. and KWON, I. 2002. Globalization and reluctant buyers. International Marketing Review, 19(6): 663-680. DOI: 10.1108/02651330210451962 Go to original source...
  40. TERLUTTER, R., DIEHL, S. and MUELLER, B. 2006. The GLOBE study - applicability of a new typology of cultural dimensions for cross-cultural marketing and advertising research. In. International Advertising and Communication. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag, pp. 421-438.
  41. USUNIER, J.-C. and LEE, J. A. 2013. Marketing across cultures. 6th Edition. London, UK: Pearson.
  42. USUNIER, J-C. 2000. Marketing Across Cultures. 3rd Edition. London: Prentice Hall.
  43. ZELDES, S. 1989. Consumption and Liquidity Constraints: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Political Economy, 97(2): 305-346. DOI: 10.1086/261605 Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.