Steve Bain

Giffen Goods Theory & Examples

To appreciate the peculiar nature of Giffen goods, it is essential to have a solid understanding of the law of demand. According to this fundamental economic principle, as the price of a good or service increases, the quantity demanded of that good or service decreases, assuming all other factors remain constant.

This relationship is often depicted graphically as a downward sloping demand curve, reflecting the inverse relationship between price and quantity demanded of a normal good. However, Giffen goods seem to defy this basic economic law.

When the price of a Giffen good increases, instead of the expected decrease in demand, there is a counterintuitive increase in demand. This phenomenon challenges the traditional understanding of consumer behavior and has puzzled economists for decades.

In this article I will explore the underlying economic principles and real-world examples that shed light on the perplexing nature of these goods.

Why a higher price might increase demand

Giffen goods are typically inferior goods, meaning that they are considered lower quality or less desirable than other available options. In some cases, typically among poor people in low-income countries, these goods may be basic necessities that form a significant portion of a consumer's budget. As the price of these goods increases, consumers can find themselves with limited financial resources, forcing them to allocate a larger proportion of their income towards these goods.

Income Effect and Substitution Effect

This counter-intuitive behavior can be attributed to the income and substitution effects. The income effect refers to the change in purchasing power resulting from a change in price. In the case of a Giffen good, as the price of the inferior good increases, the purchasing power of consumers with limited budgets diminishes. This leads to a shift in consumption patterns, with consumers allocating a larger portion of their income to the good.

The substitution effect, on the other hand, relates to the change in demand for a good resulting from a change in the price of a substitute good. In the case of Giffen goods, the limited financial resources of consumers force them to substitute higher-priced goods with lower-priced alternatives. However, since Giffen goods are often considered inferior and have no close substitutes, the substitution effect is weak or non-existent, further reinforcing the income effect and leading to an increase in demand.

Giffen Good Graph

The Giffen good graph below illustrates how a rise in the price of a good can cause demand for it to increase.

Giffen Good Graph

Starting on the top part of the graph, assume that a consumer has a weekly income of $30 which is spent on servings of beef and/or rice. If beef costs $10 per serving and rice costs $2 then the budget line (BL1) plots all affordable combinations of both serving types.

The highest possible indifference curve just touches BL1 at point A, where the consumer chooses his/her optimal affordable combination of 2 beef servings and 5 rice servings (with a total cost of $30).

Now, if the price of rice rises to $3 per serving, the highest indifference curve touches the new budget constraint (BL2) at point B, with a preferred combination of 1 beef serving and 6 rice servings (and a total cost of $28).

The red price consumption curve is backward-bending in the case of a Giffen good, rice in this example. This is because the reduced purchasing power of the consumer's $30 budget (i.e. the income effect) outweighed the reduced relative price of beef (the substitution effect), because the consumer preferred to continue eating 7 total servings of food each week.

The bottom part of the Giffen good graph illustrates an upward sloping demand curve, because consumption of rice increased from 5 servings to 6 servings even as its price rose from $2 per serving to $3.

Other Factors

Another crucial factor is the income elasticity of demand. Giffen goods typically have a low income-elasticity, meaning that as income increases, the demand for them may not rise significantly, even if the prices remain constant.

Cultural and social factors also influence the demand for goods. In some cultures, certain goods may hold symbolic value or have strong traditional associations, making them more desirable even if they are considered inferior by objective standards.

Challenges in Studying Giffen Good Behavior

Studying these goods presents several challenges that complicate our understanding of this phenomenon. One significant challenge is the scarcity of data and empirical evidence. Giffen goods are relatively rare, and their demand dynamics are influenced by specific economic and social contexts. As a result, it can be challenging to find sufficient data to draw meaningful conclusions and generalizations.

Another challenge lies in isolating the income and substitution effects from other factors that may influence demand. Consumer preferences, cultural norms, and external shocks can all impact the demand for goods, making it difficult to attribute changes solely to the income and substitution effects.

Additionally, conducting controlled experiments presents ethical and practical challenges. Manipulating prices and observing the resulting changes in demand for essential goods raises ethical concerns, making it challenging to obtain robust experimental data.

Examples of Giffen Good behavior

While the original observation by Robert Giffen during the Great Potato Famine in Ireland remains one of the most prominent examples of Giffen goods, it has been challenged by some researchers. The MIT notes below argue that this example fails because consumption of potatoes did not rise during the famine, the problem was actually caused by a shortage of potatoes due to crop failures.

There have been other instances throughout history that better demonstrate this unique phenomenon. One such example is the case of rice in China during the early 2000s.

During this period, the price of rice surged due to a combination of factors including droughts and trade restrictions. Despite the increase in price, the demand for rice among low-income households actually rose. These households, unable to afford other food options, had no choice but to increase their consumption of rice, making it a Giffen good in this particular context.

Similarly, in certain African countries, maize has been identified as a Giffen good. As the price of maize increases, consumers, particularly those in rural areas with limited access to alternative food sources, are forced to prioritize their limited resources towards this staple crop.

These historical examples highlight the importance of understanding the specific economic and social contexts in which these types of economic goods emerge. Factors such as income levels, availability of substitutes, and cultural preferences all play a role in determining the demand for goods.

Giffen Goods Vs. Veblen Goods

Veblen goods are often confused with Giffen goods because they too have increasing demand as their prices rise.

However, the important difference here is that Veblen goods are luxury goods, and the increased demand for them at higher prices reflects the extra status and prestige that consumers gain from purchasing them when most other consumers cannot afford them.


In conclusion, Giffen goods continue to captivate economists and researchers, challenging the conventional wisdom and offering valuable insights into the intricate dynamics of supply and demand. Understanding the demand patterns for these goods requires a deep exploration of economic principles, historical examples, and the factors that influence consumer behavior.

While they remain relatively rare and difficult to study, their existence challenges traditional economic theories and highlights the complexities of consumer decision-making. The interplay between the income and substitution effects, along with factors such as income levels, availability of substitutes, and cultural preferences, all contribute to the demand dynamics.

From a policy perspective, understanding Giffen goods can have implications for poverty alleviation and income redistribution strategies. Recognizing that certain goods may exhibit Giffen behavior among low-income populations can inform policymakers about the specific challenges faced by these communities and guide the development of targeted interventions.

Moreover, the study of Giffen goods contributes to the broader understanding of market dynamics and the forces that shape consumer preferences. By challenging the traditional economic theories, Giffen goods push economists to reevaluate existing models and develop more nuanced frameworks that capture the complexities of consumer behavior.


Related Pages: