Skip to main content
edited title
Link
Richard Hardy
  • 2.6k
  • 1
  • 14
  • 30

Why can the Lagrangian Multiplier can be dropped in the inverse demand function?

Source Link

Why the Lagrangian Multiplier can be dropped in the inverse demand function?

I'm deriving the Antras and Helpman (2004) paper. The model assumes a nested CES utility function $$ U = x_0 + \frac{1}{\mu} \sum_{j=1}^{J} X_j^\mu $$ where $X_j = \left[ \int x_j(i)^\alpha \,di \right]^{1/\alpha}$.

The paper straightforwardly shows that the inverse demand function for each variety i in sector j is $$ p_j(i) = X^{\mu-\alpha}x_j(i)^{\alpha-1} $$

I know this can be obtained by setting up the Lagrangian function and finding the first-order condition with respect to $x_j(i)$. But why here we can drop the Lagrangian multiplier $\lambda$? What I actually found is $$ p_j(i) = X^{\mu-\alpha}x_j(i)^{\alpha-1} (1/\lambda) $$ I suspect in this case we can normalise $\lambda$ to 1 due to some implicit assumption that is not clearly stated in the paper. But I never heard that we could easily drop or normalise the Lagrangian multiplier in any of my previous economics and maths class.