Marginal utility

Summary

In economics, utility refers to the satisfaction or benefit that consumers derive from consuming a product or service. Marginal utility, on the other hand, describes the change in pleasure or satisfaction resulting from an increase or decrease in consumption of one unit of a good or service. Marginal utility can be positive, negative, or zero. For example, when eating pizza, the second piece brings more satisfaction than the first, indicating positive marginal utility. However, after the third or fourth piece, the satisfaction level starts to decrease, indicating zero or negative marginal utility. Negative marginal utility implies that every additional unit consumed causes more harm than good, leading to a decrease in overall utility. In contrast, positive marginal utility indicated that every additional unit consumed increases overall utility. In the context of cardinal utility, economists postulate a law of diminishing marginal utility. This law states that the first unit of cons

Official source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility

About this result

This page is automatically generated and may contain information that is not correct, complete, up-to-date, or relevant to your search query. The same applies to every other page on this website. Please make sure to verify the information with EPFL's official sources.

Related publications (20)

Related publications

Related people (3)

Related people

Related units (3)

Related units

Related concepts (38)

Related concepts

Related courses (24)

Related courses

Related lectures (51)

Related lectures

, ,

In a supply chain, the importance of information elicitation from the supply chain players is vital to design supply chain network. The rationality and self-centredness of these players causes the information asymmetry in the supply chain and thus situation of conflict and non-participation of the players in the network design process. In such situations, it is required to analyse the supply chain players' behaviour in order to explore potential for coordination through incentives. In this paper, a novel approach of social utility analysis is proposed to elicit the information for supply chain coordination among the supply chain players in a dyadic relationship - supplier and buyer. In principal, we consider a monopsony situation where buyer is a dominant player. With the objective of maximizing the social utility, efforts have been made to value behavioural issues in supply chain. On the other hand, the reluctance of player due to the information asymmetry is measured in the form of inertia - an offset to the supply chain profit. The suppliers' behaviour is analysed with three distinct level of risk for two types of the product in procurement process. The useful insight from this paper is in supplier selection process where the reluctance of supplier offsets supply chain profit. The paper provides recommendations to supply chain managers for efficient decision-making ability in supplier selection process.

Palgrave Macmillan Ltd2017

Financing Investment: The Choice between Public and Private Debt

Erwan Morellec, Philip Valta

We build a dynamic model of investment and financing decisions to study the choice between bonds and bank loans in a firm's marginal financing decision and its effects on corporate investment. We show that firms with more growth options, higher bargaining power in default, operating in more competitive product markets, and facing lower credit supply are more likely to issue bonds. We also demonstrate that, by changing the cost of financing, these characteristics affect the timing of investment. We test these predictions using a sample of U.S. firms and present new evidence which is strongly supportive of our theory.

Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series2012

We build a model of investment and financing decisions to study the choice between bonds and bank loans in a firm's marginal financing decision and its effects on corporate investment. We show that firms with more growth options, with higher bargaining power in default, operating in more competitive product markets, or facing lower credit supply are more likely to issue bonds. We also demonstrate that, by changing the cost of financing, these characteristics affect the timing of investment. We test these predictions using a sample of U.S. firms and present new evidence that supports our theory.

2015