Title: Public Goods and Common Resources
116
CHAPTER
Public Goods and Common Resources
2After studying this chapter you will be able to
- Distinguish among private goods, public goods,
and common resources - Explain how the free-rider problem arises and how
the quantity of public goods is determined - Explain the tragedy of the commons and its
possible solutions
3Free Riding and Overusing the Commons
- Why does government provide some goods and
services such as the enforcement of law and order
and national defense? - Why dont we let private firms produce these
items and leave people to buy the quantities they
demand? - Ocean fish are a common resource that everyone is
free to take. - Are our fish stocks being depleted? What can be
done to conserve the worlds fish?
4Classifying Goods and Resources
- What is the essential difference between
- A city police department and Brinks security
- Fish in the Atlantic Ocean and fish in a fish
farm - A live concert and a concert on television
- These and all goods and services can be
classified according to whether they are
excludable or nonexcludable and rival or nonrival.
5Classifying Goods and Resources
- Excludable
- A good is excludable if only the people who pay
for it are able to enjoy its benefits. - Brinkss security services, East Point Seafoods
fish, and a Coldplay concert are examples. - Nonexcludable
- A good is nonexcludable if everyone benefits from
it regardless of whether they pay for it. - The services of the LAPD, fish in the Pacific
Ocean, and a concert on network television are
examples.
6Classifying Goods and Resources
- Rival
- A good is rival if one persons use of it
decreases the quantity available for someone
else. - A Brinkss truck cant deliver cash to two banks
at the same time. A fish can be consumed only
once. - Nonrival
- A good is nonrival if one persons use of it does
not decrease the quantity available for someone
else. - The services of the LAPD and a concert on network
television are nonrival.
7Classifying Goods and Resources
- A Four-Fold Classification
- Private Goods
- A private good is both rival and excludable.
- A can of Coke and a fish on East Point Seafoods
farm are examples of private goods. - Public goods
- A public good is both nonrival and nonexcludable.
A public good can be consumed simultaneously by
everyone, and no one can be excluded from
enjoying its benefits. - National defense is the best example of a public
good.
8Classifying Goods and Resources
- Common Resources
- A common resource is rival and nonexcludable.
- A unit of a common resource can be used only
once, but no one can be prevented from using what
is available. Ocean fish are a common resource. - They are rival because a fish taken by one person
isnt available for anyone else. - They are nonexcludable because it is difficult to
prevent people from catching them.
9Classifying Goods and Resources
- Natural Monopolies
- In a natural monopoly, economies of scale exist
over the entire range of output for which there
is a demand. - A special case of natural monopoly arises when
the good or service can be produced at zero
marginal cost. Such a good is nonrival. If it is
also excludable, it is produced by a natural
monopoly. - The Internet and cable television are examples.
10Classifying Goods and Resources
- Figure 16.1 shows this four-fold classification
of goods and services.
11(No Transcript)
12Classifying Goods and Resources
- Two Problems
- Public goods create a free-rider problemthe
absence of an incentive for people to pay for
what they consume. - Common resources create a problem called the
tragedy of the commonsthe absence of incentives
to prevent the overuse and depletion of a
resource.
13Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- The value of a private good is the maximum amount
that a person is willing to pay for one more unit
of it. - The value of a public good is the maximum amount
that all the people are willing to pay for one
more unit of it. - To calculate the value placed on a public good,
we use the concepts of total benefit and marginal
benefit.
14Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- The Benefit of a Public Good
- Total benefit is the dollar value that a person
places on a given quantity of a good. - The greater the quantity of a good, the larger is
a persons total benefit. - Marginal benefit is the increase in total benefit
that results from a one-unit increase in the
quantity of a good. - The marginal benefit of a public good diminishes
with the level of the good provided.
15Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Figure 16.2 shows how the marginal social benefit
of a public good is the sum of marginal benefits
of everyone at each quantity of the good
provided. - Part (a) shows Lisas marginal benefit.
- Part (b) shows Maxs marginal benefit.
16(No Transcript)
17Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- The economys marginal social benefit of a public
good is the sum of the marginal benefits of all
individuals at each quantity of the good
provided. - The economys marginal social benefit curve for a
public good is the vertical sum of all individual
marginal benefit curves.
18(No Transcript)
19Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- The marginal social benefit curve for a public
good contrasts with the demand curve for a
private good, which is the horizontal sum of the
individual demand curves at each price.
20Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- The Efficient Quantity of a Public Good
- The efficient quantity of a public good is the
quantity that maximizes net benefittotal benefit
minus total cost. - This quantity is the same as the quantity at
which marginal social benefit equals marginal
social cost.
21Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- The total cost curve, TC, is like the total cost
curve for a private good. - The total benefit curve, TB, is just the sum of
the marginal benefit at each output level. - The efficient quantity is where net benefit is
maximized.
22(No Transcript)
23Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Equivalently, the efficient quantity is produced
where marginal social benefit equals marginal
social cost. - If marginal social benefit exceeds marginal
social cost, net benefit will increase if output
is increased.
24(No Transcript)
25Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- If marginal social cost exceeds marginal social
benefit, net benefit will increase if output is
decreased. - So the quantity at which marginal social benefit
equals marginal social cost maximizes net benefit.
26Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Private Provision
- If a private firm tried to produce and sell a
public good, almost no one would buy it. - The free-rider problem results in too little of
the good being produced.
27Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Public Provision
- Because the government can tax all the consumers
of the public good and force everyone to pay for
its provision, public provision overcomes the
free-rider problem. - If two political parties compete, each is driven
to propose the efficient quantity of a public
good. - A party that proposes either too much or too
little can be beaten by one that proposes the
efficient amount because more people vote for an
increase in net benefit.
28Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Principle of Minimum Differentiation
- The attempt by politicians to appeal to a
majority of voters leads them to the same
policiesan example of the principle of minimum
differentiation. - The principle of minimum differentiation is the
tendency for competitors to make themselves
similar so as to appeal to the maximum number of
clients (voters). - (The same principle applies to competing firms
such as McDonalds and Burger King).
29Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- The Role of Bureaucrats
- Figure 16.4 shows the goal of bureaucrats, which
is to seek the highest attainable budget for
providing a public good.
30(No Transcript)
31Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Bureaucrats might provide the efficient quantity.
- But they try to increase their budget to equal
the total benefit of the public good and drive
the net benefit to zero. - Bureaucrats might also try to over provide a
public good.
32Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Well-informed voters would ensure that
politicians prevent the bureaucrats from
increasing their budget above the minimum total
cost of producing the efficient quantity. - But is it not rational for voters to be well
informed.
33Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Rational Ignorance
- Rational ignorance is the decision by a voter not
to acquire information about a policy or
provision of a public good because the cost of
doing so exceeds the expected benefit. - For voters who consume but dont produce a public
good, it is rational to be ignorant about the
costs and benefit. - For voters who produce a public good, it is
rational to be well informed. - When the rationality of uninformed voters and
special interest groups is taken into account,
the political equilibrium results in
overprovision of public goods.
34Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Two Types of Political Equilibrium
- The two types of political equilibriumefficient
provision and inefficient overprovision of public
goods correspond to two theories of government - Social interest theory predicts that political
equilibrium achieves efficiency because
well-informed voters refuse to support
inefficient policies. - Public choice theory predicts that government
delivers an inefficient allocation of
resourcesthat government failure parallels
market failure.
35Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Why Government Is Large and Grows
- Two possible reasons are
- Voter preferences
- Inefficient overprovision
- Government grows because the voters demand for
some public goods is income elastic. - Inefficient overprovision might explain the size
of government but not its growth rate.
36Public Goods and the Free-Rider Problem
- Voters Strike Back
- If government grows too large relative to the
value voters place on public goods, there might
be a voter backlash that leads politicians to
propose smaller government. - Privatization is one way of coping with overgrown
government and is based on distinguishing between
public provision and public production of public
goods.
37Common Resources
- The Tragedy of the Commons
- The tragedy of the commons is the absence of
incentives to prevent the overuse and depletion
of a commonly owned resource. - Examples include the Atlantic Ocean cod stocks,
South Pacific whales, and the quality of the
earths atmosphere. - The traditional example from which the term
derives is the common grazing land surrounding
middle-age villages.
38Common Resources
- Sustainable Production
- Figure 16.5 illustrates production possibilities
from a common resource. - As the number of fishing boats increases, the
quantity of fish caught increases to some
maximum. - Overfishing occurs when the maximum sustainable
catch decreases.
39(No Transcript)
40Common Resources
- An Overfishing Equilibrium
- Figure 16.6 shows why a common resource get
overused. - The average catch per boat, which is the marginal
private benefit, MB, decreases as the number of
boats increases. - The marginal cost per boat is MC (assumed
constant).
41(No Transcript)
42Common Resources
- Equilibrium occurs where marginal private
benefit, MB, equals marginal cost, MC. - In equilibrium, the resource is overused because
no one takes into account the effects of her/his
actions on other users of the resources.
43Common Resources
- The Efficient Use of the Commons
- The quantity of fish caught by each boat
decreases as the number of boats increases. - But no one has an incentive to take this fact
into account when deciding whether to fish. - The efficient use of a common resource requires
marginal social cost to equal marginal social
benefit.
44Common Resources
- Marginal Social Benefit
- Marginal social benefit is the increase in total
fish catch that results from an additional boat,
not the average catch per boat. - The table on the next slide shows the calculation
of marginal social benefit.
45Common Resources
Boats Total Catch MSB
A 0 0
90
B 1 90
70
C 2 160
50
D 3 210
30
E 4 240
46Common Resources
- Efficient Use
- Figure 16.7 shows the marginal social benefit
curve, MSB, and the marginal private benefit
curve, MB. - With no external costs, the marginal social cost
MSC equals marginal cost MC. - The resource use is efficient when MSB equals MSC.
47(No Transcript)
48Common Resources
- Achieving an Efficient Outcome
- It is harder to achieve an efficient use of a
common resource than to define the conditions
under which it occurs. - Three methods that might be used are
- Property rights
- Quotas
- Individual transferable quotas (ITQs)
49Common Resources
- Property Rights
- By assigning property rights, common property
becomes private property. - When someone owns a resource, the owner is
confronted with the full consequences of her/his
actions in using that resources. - The social benefits become the private benefits.
- But assigning property rights is not always
feasible.
50Common Resources
- Quotas
- By setting a production quota at the efficient
quantity, a common resource might remain in
common use but be used efficiently. - Figure 16.8 shows this situation.
- It is hard to make a quota work.
51(No Transcript)
52Common Resources
- Individual Transferable Quotas
- An individual transferable quota (ITQ) is a
production limit that is assigned to an
individual who is free to transfer the quota to
someone else. - A market in ITQs emerges.
- If the efficient quantity of ITQs is assigned,
the market price of an ITQ confronts resource
users with a marginal cost that equals MSB at the
efficient quantity.
53Common Resources
- Figure 16.9 shows the situation with an efficient
number of ITQs. - The market price of an ITQ increases the marginal
cost to MC1. - Users of the resource make marginal private
benefit, MB, equal to marginal private cost, MC1,
and the outcome is efficient.
54(No Transcript)
55Common Resources
- Public Choice and Political Equilibrium
- It is easy for economists to agree that ITQs make
it possible to achieve an efficient use of a
common resource. - It is difficult to get the political marketplace
to deliver that outcome. - In 1996, Congress killed an attempt to use ITQs
in the Gulf of Mexico and the Northern Pacific
Ocean. - Self-interest and capture of the political
process sometimes beats the social interest.
56THE END