17.3 public goods

45
What is a Public Good? Efficient Provision of Public Goods The Efficiency Conditions Private Provision of Public Goods Free-Riders Privatization

Upload: hamish

Post on 05-Jan-2016

67 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

17.3 Public Goods. What is a Public Good? Efficient Provision of Public Goods The Efficiency Conditions Private Provision of Public Goods Free-Riders Privatization. Theory - What is a Public Good?. A PURE PUBLIC GOOD has two features: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 17.3 Public Goods

What is a Public Good? Efficient Provision of Public Goods

The Efficiency Conditions Private Provision of Public Goods Free-Riders Privatization

Page 2: 17.3 Public Goods

A PURE PUBLIC GOOD has two features:

1) Nonrival – once provided, another person can consume it at no additional cost

2) Nonexcludable (nonexclusive) – once provided, it is impossible or highly expensive to prevent anyone from consuming it

2

Page 3: 17.3 Public Goods

National Defense is a good example of a pure public good:

1) Nonrival – all Canadians benefit2) Nonexcludable – it’s impossible to prevent a

Canadian from benefitting

Other examples: Conventional Radio, A Beautiful View, A Canada-Wide Sunglass dome designed to block harmful sun rays (Canadome)

3

Page 4: 17.3 Public Goods

A PRIVATE GOOD has two features:1) Rival – once consumed, another person

cannot consume it2) Excludable (exclusive) – others can be

prevented from consuming it

Food (ie: pizza or sushi) is a good example of a private good. Once I eat it, it’s gone. (YUM!)

4

Page 5: 17.3 Public Goods

6 Issues arise out of Pure Public Goods:6 Issues arise out of Pure Public Goods:1)1)Different ValuesDifferent Values2)2)Public Goods Aren’t AbsolutePublic Goods Aren’t Absolute3)NONRIVAL ≠ NONEXCLUDABLE4)Unconventional Public Good5)Private Provision6)Private Production

5

Page 6: 17.3 Public Goods

-National defense protects everyone equally. Paranoid people love it and peace activists hate it.

-The Canadome is popular among people concerned with cancer and unpopular with people wanting tans. It affects everyone, however

6

Page 7: 17.3 Public Goods

-technology and the market can affect a public good. A free TV station becomes private if you need a decoder. A beautiful view becomes rival if there is a crowd.

-An IMPURE PUBLIC GOOD is to some extent rival or to some extent excludable

-most public goods are impure, but analysis of pure public goods still gives valuable results for impure public goods

7

Page 8: 17.3 Public Goods

-National parks are excludable if they have gates, but practically nonrival as they are so big

-My office hours are nonexcludable, as everyone is welcome, but rival if too many people are waiting in line

-Therefore many public goods are impure public goods

8

Page 9: 17.3 Public Goods

-Inspiration can be nonrival and nonexcludable (such as coming from a sunset)

-Fear is nonrival, as one person being afraid doesn’t prevent others. Fear is also nonexcludable, as its hard to prevent.

-Income distribution or honesty are public goods as everyone benefits

9

Page 10: 17.3 Public Goods

-Medical services, housing, licenses, and utilities can all be provided by the government and/or private sector

-The label public or private doesn’t indicate what sector provides the item

10

Page 11: 17.3 Public Goods

-Some public services are contracted out to private contractors

-For example, the City of Edmonton contracts out much of its snow removal business-it provides the public service through private contractors

11

Page 12: 17.3 Public Goods

-To cover efficient provision of public goods, we first look at efficient provision of private goods

-Consider Maka and Susan’s individual demands for video games

-At a market price, we add up Maka and Susan’s quantity demanded for video games to find market demand

-This results in a HORIZONTAL SUMMATION

12

Page 13: 17.3 Public Goods

13

2

Maka Susan Market demand

40

100

Q Q Q

P P P

@ P=$40, QM+QS=QD

2+5=7

5 7

Page 14: 17.3 Public Goods

14

2

Maka Susan Market

40

100

Q Q Q

P P P

When market supply intersects market demand, we find equilibrium price and individual demand.

5 7

S

Q*=51.5

3.5

@ P*=$65, QM+QS=Q*

1.5+3.5=5

65

Page 15: 17.3 Public Goods

-From microeconomic theory, we know that a consumer maximizes utility where MRSxy=Px/Py

-If we normalize Py to $1, this simplifies to MRSxy=Px

-Since price is found on the demand curve, Maka’s (Susan’s) demand expresses Maka’s (Susan’s) MRS at each level of consumption

15

Page 16: 17.3 Public Goods

-From microeconomic theory, the supply curve comes from MC

-MRTxy=MCx/MCy, but since Py=MCy and Py=$1, MRTxy=MCx

-therefore the supply curve represents MRTxy

Then, at equilibrium, Supply=Demand, and

16

PersonBxy

PersonAxyxy MRSMRSMRT

Pareto Efficiency Condition

Page 17: 17.3 Public Goods

-Consider Maka and Susan’s individual demands for a public good: youtube cooking shows

-youtube is nonrival and nonexcludable; one person’s consumption doesn’t affect the other

-The key difference in a public good is that BOTH can consume a purchased good; it is not used up

-This results in a VERTICAL SUMMATION to calculate willingness to pay

17

Page 18: 17.3 Public Goods

18

2

Maka Susan

Market demand

4

10

Q Q Q

P P P

Maka is willing to pay $4 each for 2 youtube shows, and Susan is willing to pay $7 each,

therefore the market is willing to pay $11 each

7

2

11

2

Page 19: 17.3 Public Goods

19

2

Maka Susan

Market demand

4

10

Q Q Q

P P P

The market Supply gives an equilibrium quantity of 3. Here price paid in the market ($6) is the sum of Maka’s payment ($2) and Susan’s payment ($4).

7

32

11

33

S

64

2

Page 20: 17.3 Public Goods

-Once again, if we normalize our other good to $1, demand (willingness to pay) represents MRS for each person.

-The sum of both people’s willingness to pay (market demand), is therefore the sum of individual MRS.

-The supply curve still represents MC and therefore MRT, so we have:

20

PersonBxy

PersonAxyxy MRSMRSMRT

Page 21: 17.3 Public Goods

-Furthermore, again since Py=$1,

21

PersonBPersonA MBMBMC -Intuitively, public goods should therefore be

provided until the point where the marginal cost of the good is equal to the sum of marginal benefits

-The private good equation can also be rewritten as

PersonBPersonA MBMBMC

Page 22: 17.3 Public Goods

In short, public goods are always best provided where

Total Marginal Benefit = Marginal Cost

22

Page 23: 17.3 Public Goods

23

1) Solve each demand for P2) Find where P=0 to find cut-off points.3) Add together applicable demand curves

between cut-off points.

Page 24: 17.3 Public Goods

24

A) Equate S=D in multiple pieces of demand function-When solved Q* value lies in the appropriate range, it is valid

B) Use individual demand to calculate each person’s price (negatives are zero)

Page 25: 17.3 Public Goods

25

Rick and Shane decide to buy some fireworks to cheer up the survivors of the Zombie apocalypse. Their demand curves and firework supply are:

20

4200

100

PQ

PQ

PQ

S

DS

DR

Page 26: 17.3 Public Goods

26

4/50

4200

100

100)1

QP

PQ

QP

PQ

DS

DS

DR

DR

200

)0(4200

100

0100)2

DS

DS

DR

DR

Q

Q

Q

Q

QP

QQP

PPP

D

D

DS

DR

D

4

5150

4/50100

100Q 3)If

4/50

100Q 3)If

QP

PPD

DS

D

Page 27: 17.3 Public Goods

27

100Q if 4

5150

100Q if 4

150

3)

Q

Q

DP

Page 28: 17.3 Public Goods

28

ValidQ

Q

Q

QQ

PP SD

8.574

9130

4

9130

204

5150

100Q If

InvalidQ

Q

QQ

PP SD

244

530

204

150

100Q If

Page 29: 17.3 Public Goods

29

2.42

8.57100

*100)2

*

*

*

R

R

R

P

P

QP

6.35

4/8.5750

4/*50)2

*

*

*

S

S

S

P

P

QP

Rick will pay $42.20 and Shane will pay $35.60 for 57.8 fireworks….

Which attracts the zombies, who eat everyone…

Which is good for the zombies?

Page 30: 17.3 Public Goods

30

Shane Rick

Market demand

Q Q Q

P P P

Shane and Rick both put money towards the public good, which everyone enjoys (until they’re eaten).

57.857.857.8

S77.8

42.2035.6

Page 31: 17.3 Public Goods

If a public good is provided privately, its efficiency depend on how people represent their willingness to pay

-For private goods, people have no incentive to misrepresent their willingness to pay-if the price is $10, and that lies in their willingness to pay, they will pay the $10, consume the good and be happy

31

Page 32: 17.3 Public Goods

-For public goods, people have an incentive to misrepresent their willingness to pay -if the price is $10, a person could hope someone else pays the price, then they get to enjoy it (they are a FREE RIDER)

-for example, at an alligator reserve, people can pay money to throw meat into the water and watch the alligators go, and often wait for someone else to buy and throw the meat

32

Page 33: 17.3 Public Goods

-If the public good can be made excludable (ie: entrance fee), it is still provided inefficiently, as the MC of an additional consumer is zero, therefore P>MC

-The one way to avoid the free rider problem is through PERFECT PRICE DISCRIMINATION – everyone pays their willingness to pay-this requires full information, therefore private provision is often doomed to be inefficient

33

Page 34: 17.3 Public Goods

THE FREE RIDER PROBLEM comes from the incentive to let others pay while you enjoy the benefits

-Yet empirically, people do band together to raise funds for public goods such as libraries

-This typically only happens when the number of contributors are small and everyone can see their impact

-Therefore government intervention is often needed for public goods

34

Page 35: 17.3 Public Goods

The argument about who should PRODUCE public goods (government or private) often hinges on two concepts:

Cost vs. Quality

35

-private companies often have lower costs due to a focus on profit and lack of unions

-private companies often produce inferior products (as in US health insurance refusing coverage or charging high premiums)

Page 36: 17.3 Public Goods

Some argue that quality can be maintained through good contracts-Some contracts are straightforward: cut the park lawn once a week-Some contracts are near impossible: treat this yet-to-be-discovered disease with the following yet-to-be-discovered drugs

36

Page 37: 17.3 Public Goods

Market structure also needs to be considered:-If the government has a monopoly, is lack of

competition causing inefficiency?-If privatization creates a monopoly or oligopoly,

will market power cause inefficiency?

37

Page 38: 17.3 Public Goods

West (1997) studied the 1993 privatization of Alberta liquor stores and learned the following:

-the number of liquor stores rose from 258 to 604, and although selection and individual stores fell, overall selection increased

-liquor prices rose between 8.5% and 10% (compared to 5% inflation)

38

Page 39: 17.3 Public Goods

-Liquor store employment tripled as wages fell by up to 50% (the union was replaced)

-There was no evidence of increased alcohol consumption or alcohol-related crimes

39

Page 40: 17.3 Public Goods

Was privatization good?More stores vs. poorer selection

Liquor Price IncreasesMore employment vs. Lower wages

If this privatization is so complex, what does that say about privatizing healthcare, utilities or schools?

40

Page 41: 17.3 Public Goods

41

Externalities occur when one agents actions affect another outside market mechanisms

Externalities cause P≠SMC, causing inefficiency

Externalities can be dealt with privately through:

1) Assigning property rights (Coase Theorem)2) Mergers3) Social Conventions

Page 42: 17.3 Public Goods

42

The government can deal with externalities through:

1) Pigouvian Taxes2) Pigouvian Subsidies3) Permits and a market4) Regulation

Taxes and Permits are generally most efficient and effective

Page 43: 17.3 Public Goods

43

All public methods to address negative externalities suffer from:1) the difficulty in measuring externalities 2) possible redistribution issues

Positive externalities can be dealt with through subsidies

These can be hard to measure Financing subsidies can be distortionary This may effect equitable distribution

Page 44: 17.3 Public Goods

Public goods are nonrival and nonexcludable Public Goods are efficiently provided

where ∑MRS=MRT or ∑MB=MC (Private goods are efficiently provided

where MRSA = MRSB = MRT) Efficient provision occurs where

Total Benefit = Total cost It is unlikely that markets would provide

public goods efficiently, even if they are excludable

44

Page 45: 17.3 Public Goods

Free-riding limits private provision of public goods

Two issues with production of public goods are efficiency and quality

Econ 384 had great students. Your professor had a lot of fun teaching this course.

45