曼昆微观经济学英文版11public_goods
曼昆《经济学原理(微观经济学分册)》(第6版)课后习题详解(第11章 公共物品和公共资源)
曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》（第6版）第11章公共物品和公共资源课后习题详解跨考网独家整理最全经济学考研真题，经济学考研课后习题解析资料库，您可以在这里查阅历年经济学考研真题，经济学考研课后习题，经济学考研参考书等内容，更有跨考考研历年辅导的经济学学哥学姐的经济学考研经验，从前辈中获得的经验对初学者来说是宝贵的财富，这或许能帮你少走弯路，躲开一些陷阱。
以下内容为跨考网独家整理，如您还需更多考研资料，可选择经济学一对一在线咨询进行咨询。
一、概念题1．排他性（excludability）答：排他性指一个人使用或消费一种产品或服务时可以阻止其他人使用或消费该种产品和服务的特性。
一种产品或服务具有排他性时，一个人使用或消费该产品或服务时可以阻止其他人使用或消费该种产品和服务。
排他性是区分公共物品和私人物品的标准之一。
生产者的排他原则有效时，生产者能够限制那些不为这种物品支付的消费者使用这种商品，消费者的排他性有效时，消费者在消费一种物品时，其他人能够被排除在外。
在排他性原则失效的地方，就会出现没有付出代价，却可以享受物品效用的“免费搭便车”现象。
2．消费中的竞争性（rivalry in consumption）答：消费中的竞争性指一种产品或服务被一个人消费从而减少了其他人消费的特性。
如果某人已经使用了某个商品（如某一火车座位），其他人就不能再同时使用该商品，则这种商品就具有消费中的竞争性。
市场机制只有在具备排他性和竞争性两个特点的私人物品的场合才真正起作用，才有效率。
3．私人物品（private goods）答：私人物品指既有排他性又有竞争性的物品，是供个人单独消费的物品。
私人物品是那种可得数量将随任何人对它的消费或使用的增加而减少的物品，它具有两个特征：第一是竞争性，如果某人已消费了某种商品，则其他人就不能再消费该商品；第二是排他性，对商品支付价格的人才能消费商品，其他人则不能。
4．公共物品（public goods）（西北大学2003研；北京师范大学2007研；华南理工大学2010研）答：公共物品与私人物品相对应，指既无排他性又无竞争性的物品。
曼昆经济学原理英文版第11章
Examine why people tend to use common r esour ces too much Consider some of the impor tant common r esour ces in our economyConsider some of the impor tant public goods in our economy Lear n t he def ini ng characteristics of public goods and common r esour ces Examine why private markets fail to pr ovide public goods See why the cost-benefit analysis of public goods is both necessar y and dif ficult An old song lyric maintains that “the best things in life are free.” A moment’s thought reveals a long list of goods that the songwriter could have had in mind. Na-ture provides some of them, such as rivers, mountains, beaches, lakes, and oceans.The government provides others, such as playgrounds, parks, and parades. In each case, people do not pay a fee when they choose to enjoy the benefit of the good.Free goods provide a special challenge for economic analysis. Most goods in our economy are allocated in markets, where buyers pay for what they receive and sellers are paid for what they provide. For these goods, prices are the signals that guide the decisions of buyers and sellers. When goods are available free of charge,however, the market forces that normally allocate resources in our economy are absent.In this chapter we examine the problems that arise for goods without market prices. Our analysis will shed light on one of the Ten Principles of EconomicsP U B L I C G O O D S A N DC O M M O N R E S O U R C ES225226PA R T FOU R TH E ECONOMICS OF THE P UBLIC SECTORin Chapter 1: Governments can sometimes improve market outcomes. When a good does not have a price attached to it, private markets cannot ensure that the good is produced and consumed in the proper amounts. In such cases, government policy can potentially remedy the market failure and raise economic well-being.How well do markets work in providing the goods that people want? The answer to this question depends on the good being considered. As we discussed in Chapter 7, we can rely on the market to provide the efficient number of ice-cream cones: The price of ice-cream cones adjusts to balance supply and demand, and this equilib-rium maximizes the sum of producer and consumer surplus. Yet, as we discussed in Chapter 10, we cannot rely on the market to prevent aluminum manufacturers from polluting the air we breathe: Buyers and sellers in a market typically do not take ac-count of the external effects of their decisions. Thus, markets work well when the good is ice cream, but they work badly when the good is clean air.In thinking about the various goods in the economy, it is useful to group them according to two characteristics:N Is the good excludable?Can people be prevented from using the good?N Is the good rival?Does one person’s use of the good diminish another person’s enjoyment of it?Using these two characteristics, Figure 11-1 divides goods into four categories:1.Private goods are both excludable and rival. Consider an ice-cream cone, for example. An ice-cream cone is excludable because it is possible to prevent someone from eating an ice-cream cone—you just don’t give it to him. An ice-cream cone is rival because if one person eats an ice-cream cone, another person cannot eat the same cone. Most goods in the economy are private goods like ice-cream cones. When we analyzed supply and demand in Chapters 4, 5, and 6 and the efficiency of markets in Chapters 7, 8, and 9, we implicitly assumed that goods were both excludable and rival.2.Public goods are neither excludable nor rival. That is, people cannot be prevented from using a public good, and one person’s enjoyment of a public good does not reduce another person’s enjoyment of it. For example, national defense is a public good. Once the country is defended from foreign aggressors, it is impossible to prevent any single person from enjoying the benefit of this defense. Moreover, when one person enjoys the benefit of national defense, he does not reduce the benefit to anyone mon resources are rival but not excludable. For example, fish in the ocean are a rival good: When one person catches fish, there are fewer fish for the next person to catch. Yet these fish are not an excludable good because itis difficult to charge fishermen for the fish that they catch.4.When a good is excludable but not rival, it is an example of a naturalmonopoly.For instance, consider fire protection in a small town. It is easy toexcluda b i l i t ythe property of a good whereby aperson can be prevented fromusing itrivalr ythe property of a good whereby oneperson’s use diminishes otherpeople’s usepr iv at e g o o d sgoods that are both excludableand rivalpubli c g o o d sgoods that are neither excludablenor rivalcom m o n r e so ur c e sgoods that are rival but notexcludableC H A P T E R 11P U B L I C G O OD S A N D C O M M O N RE S O U R C E S 227exclude people from enjoying this good: The fire department can just let their house burn down. Yet fire protection is not rival. Firefighters spend much of their time waiting for a fire, so protecting an extra house is unlikely to reduce the protection available to others. In other words, once a town has paid for the fire department, the additional cost of protecting one more house issmall. In Chapter 15 we give a more complete definition of naturalmonopolies and study them in some detail.In this chapter we examine goods that are not excludable and, therefore, are available to everyone free of charge: public goods and common resources. As we will see, this topic is closely related to the study of externalities. For both public goods and common resources, externalities arise because something of value has no price attached to it. If one person were to provide a public good, such as na-tional defense, other people would be better off, and yet they could not be charged for this benefit. Similarly, when one person uses a common resource, such as the fish in the ocean, other people are worse off, and yet they are not compensated for this loss. Because of these external effects, private decisions about consumption and production can lead to an inefficient allocation of resources, and government intervention can potentially raise economic well-being.QUICK QUIZ:Define public goods and common resources,and give anexample of each.To understand how public goods differ from other goods and what problems they present for society, let’s consider an example: a fireworks display. This good is not excludable because it is impossible to prevent someone from seeing fireworks, and it is not rival because one person’s enjoyment of fireworks does not reduce anyone else’s enjoyment of them.228PA R T FOU R TH E ECONOMICS OF THE P UBLIC SECTORTH E FR EE -RI D ER P ROB L EM The citizens of Smalltown, U.S.A., like seeing fireworks on the Fourth of July. Each of the town’s 500 residents places a $10 value on the experience. The cost of putting on a fireworks display is $1,000. Because the $5,000 of benefits exceed the $1,000 of costs, it is efficient for Smalltown residents to see fireworks on the Fourth of July.Would the private market produce the efficient outcome? Probably not. Imag-ine that Ellen, a Smalltown entrepreneur, decided to put on a fireworks display.Ellen would surely have trouble selling tickets to the event because her potential customers would quickly figure out that they could see the fireworks even without a ticket. Fireworks are not excludable, so people have an incentive to be free riders.A free rider is a person who receives the benefit of a good but avoids paying for it.One way to view this market failure is that it arises because of an externality.If Ellen did put on the fireworks display, she would confer an external benefit onthose who saw the display without paying for it. When deciding whether to put on the display, Ellen ignores these external benefits. Even though a fireworks dis-play is socially desirable, it is not privately profitable. As a result, Ellen makes the socially inefficient decision not to put on the display.Although the private market fails to supply the fireworks display demanded by Smalltown residents, the solution to Smalltown’s problem is obvious: The local government can sponsor a Fourth of July celebration. The town council can raise everyone’s taxes by $2 and use the revenue to hire Ellen to produce the fireworks.Everyone in Smalltown is better off by $8—the $10 in value from the fireworks mi-nus the $2 tax bill. Ellen can help Smalltown reach the efficient outcome as a pub-lic employee even though she could not do so as a private entrepreneur.The story of Smalltown is simplified, but it is also realistic. In fact, many local governments in the United States do pay for fireworks on the Fourth of July. More-over, the story shows a general lesson about public goods: Because public goods are not excludable, the free-rider problem prevents the private market from sup-plying them. The government, however, can potentially remedy the problem. If the government decides that the total benefits exceed the costs, it can provide the public good and pay for it with tax revenue, making everyone better off.SOME IMPOR TANT PUBLIC GOODSThere are many examples of public goods. Here we consider three of the most important.N at i onal Def ens e The defense of the country from foreign aggressors is a classic example of a public good. It is also one of the most expensive. In 1999 the U.S. federal government spent a total of $277 billion on national defense, or about $1,018 per person. People disagree about whether this amount is too small or too large, but almost no one doubts that some government spending for national de-fense is necessary. Even economists who advocate small government agree that the national defense is a public good the government should provide.B a s i c R e s e a r c h The creation of knowledge is a public good. If a mathe-matician proves a new theorem, the theorem enters the general pool of knowledgefr ee ridera person who receives the benefit of agood but avoids paying for itC H A P T E R11P U B L I C G O OD S A N D C O M M O N RE S O U R C E S229“I like the concept if we can do it with no new taxes.”that anyone can use without charge. Because knowledge is a public good, profit-seeking firms tend to free ride on the knowledge created by others and, as a result,devote too few resources to the creation of knowledge.In evaluating the appropriate policy toward knowledge creation, it is impor-tant to distinguish general knowledge from specific, technological knowledge.Specific, technological knowledge, such as the invention of a better battery, can bepatented. The inventor thus obtains much of the benefit of his invention, althoughcertainly not all of it. By contrast, a mathematician cannot patent a theorem; suchgeneral knowledge is freely available to everyone. In other words, the patent sys-tem makes specific, technological knowledge excludable, whereas general knowl-edge is not excludable.The government tries to provide the public good of general knowledge in var-ious ways. Government agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health and theNational Science Foundation, subsidize basic research in medicine, mathematics,physics, chemistry, biology, and even economics. Some people justify governmentfunding of the space program on the grounds that it adds to society’s pool ofknowledge. Certainly, many private goods, including bullet-proof vests and the in-stant drink Tang, use materials that were first developed by scientists and engi-neers trying to land a man on the moon. Determining the appropriate level ofgovernmental support for these endeavors is difficult because the benefits are hardto measure. Moreover, the members of Congress who appropriate funds for re-search usually have little expertise in science and, therefore, are not in the best po-sition to judge what lines of research will produce the largest benefits.F i g h t i n g P o v e r t y Many government programs are aimed at helping thepoor. The welfare system (officially called Temporary Assistance for Needy Fami-lies) provides a small income for some poor families. Similarly, the Food Stampprogram subsidizes the purchase of food for those with low incomes, and variousgovernment housing programs make shelter more affordable. These antipovertyprograms are financed by taxes on families that are financially more successful.230PA R T FOU R TH E ECONOMICS OF THE P UBLIC SECTORC ASE ST UD Y ARE LIGHTHOUSES PUBLIC GOODS?Some goods can switch between being public goods and being private goods depending on the circumstances. For example, a fireworks display is a public good if performed in a town with many residents. Yet if performed at a private amusement park, such as Walt Disney World, a fireworks display is more like a private good because visitors to the park pay for admission.Another example is a lighthouse. Economists have long used lighthouses as examples of a public good. Lighthouses are used to mark specific locations so that passing ships can avoid treacherous waters. The benefit that the lighthouse provides to the ship captain is neither excludable nor rival, so each captain has an incentive to free ride by using the lighthouse to navigate without paying for the service. Because of this free-rider problem, private markets usually fail to provide the lighthouses that ship captains need. As a result, most lighthouses today are operated by the government.Economists disagree among themselves about what role the government should play in fighting poverty. Although we will discuss this debate more fully in Chapter 20, here we note one important argument: Advocates of antipoverty pro-grams claim that fighting poverty is a public good.Suppose that everyone prefers to live in a society without poverty. Even if this preference is strong and widespread, fighting poverty is not a “good” that the pri-vate market can provide. No single individual can eliminate poverty because the problem is so large. Moreover, private charity is hard pressed to solve the problem:People who do not donate to charity can free ride on the generosity of others. In this case, taxing the wealthy to raise the living standards of the poor can make everyone better off. The poor are better off because they now enjoy a higher stan-dard of living, and those paying the taxes are better off because they enjoy living in a society with less poverty.U SE OF THE LIGHTHOUSE IS FREE TO THE BOAT OWNER . D OES THIS MAKE THE LIGHTHOUSE A PUBLIC GOOD?C H A P T E R11P U B L I C G O OD S A N D C O M M O N RE S O U R C E S231In some cases, however, lighthouses may be closer to private goods. On thecoast of England in the nineteenth century, some lighthouses were privatelyowned and operated. The owner of the local lighthouse did not try to chargeship captains for the service but did charge the owner of the nearby port. If theport owner did not pay, the lighthouse owner turned off the light, and shipsavoided that port.In deciding whether something is a public good, one must determine thenumber of beneficiaries and whether these beneficiaries can be excluded fromenjoying the good. A free-rider problem arises when the number of beneficiariesis large and exclusion of any one of them is impossible. If a lighthouse benefitsmany ship captains, it is a public good. Yet if it primarily benefits a single portowner, it is more like a private good.THE DIFFICULT JOB OF COST-BENEFIT ANALYSISSo far we have seen that the government provides public goods because the pri-vate market on its own will not produce an efficient quantity. Yet deciding that thegovernment must play a role is only the first step. The government must then de-termine what kinds of public goods to provide and in what quantities.Suppose that the government is considering a public project, such as buildinga new highway. To judge whether to build the highway, it must compare the totalbenefits of all those who would use it to the costs of building and maintaining it.To make this decision, the government might hire a team of economists and engi-neers to conduct a study, called a cost-benefit analysis,the goal of which is to es-timate the total costs and benefits of the project to society as a whole.Cost-benefit analysts have a tough job. Because the highway will be available to everyone free of charge, there is no price with which to judge the value of the highway. Simply asking people how much they would value the highway is not reliable. First, quantifying benefits is difficult using the results from a question-naire. Second, respondents have little incentive to tell the truth. Those who would use the highway have an incentive to exaggerate the benefit they receive to get the highway built. Those who would be harmed by the highway have an incentive to exaggerate the costs to them to prevent the highway from being built.The efficient provision of public goods is, therefore, intrinsically more difficult than the efficient provision of private goods. Private goods are provided in the market. Buyers of a private good reveal the value they place on it by the prices they are willing to pay. Sellers reveal their costs by the prices they are willing to accept. By contrast, cost-benefit analysts do not observe any price signals when evaluating whether the government should provide a public good. Their findings on the costs and benefits of public projects are, therefore, rough approximations at best.cost-benefit analysisa study that compares the costs and benefits to society of providing a public goodCASE STUDY HOW MUCH IS A LIFE WORTH?Imagine that you have been elected to serve as a member of your local town council. The town engineer comes to you with a proposal: The town can spend $10,000 to build and operate a traffic light at a town intersection that now has only a stop sign. The benefit of the traffic light is increased safety. The engineer232PA R T FOU R TH E ECONOMICS OF THE P UBLIC SECTORestimates, based on data from similar intersections, that the traffic light wouldreduce the risk of a fatal traffic accident over the lifetime of the traffic light from1.6 to 1.1 percent. Should you spend the money for the new light?To answer this question, you turn to cost-benefit analysis. But you quicklyrun into an obstacle: The costs and benefits must be measured in the same unitsif you are to compare them meaningfully. The cost is measured in dollars, butthe benefit—the possibility of saving a person’s life—is not directly monetary.To make your decision, you have to put a dollar value on a human life.At first, you may be tempted to conclude that a human life is priceless. Af-ter all, there is probably no amount of money that you could be paid to volun-tarily give up your life or that of a loved one. This suggests that a human lifehas an infinite dollar value.For the purposes of cost-benefit analysis, however, this answer leads tononsensical results. If we truly placed an infinite value on human life, weshould be placing traffic lights on every street corner. Similarly, we should all bedriving large cars with all the latest safety features, instead of smaller ones withfewer safety features. Yet traffic lights are not at every corner, and people some-times choose to buy small cars without side-impact air bags or antilock brakes.In both our public and private decisions, we are at times willing to risk our livesto save some money.Once we have accepted the idea that a person’s life does have an implicitdollar value, how can we determine what that value is? One approach, some-times used by courts to award damages in wrongful-death suits, is to look at thetotal amount of money a person would have earned if he or she had lived.Economists are often critical of this approach. It has the bizarre implication thatthe life of a retired or disabled person has no value.A better way to value human life is to look at the risks that people are vol-untarily willing to take and how much they must be paid for taking them. Mor-tality risk varies across jobs, for example. Construction workers in high-risebuildings face greater risk of death on the job than office workers do. By com-paring wages in risky and less risky occupations, controlling for education, ex-perience, and other determinants of wages, economists can get some senseabout what value people put on their own lives. Studies using this approachconclude that the value of a human life is about $10 million.EVERYONE WOULDLIKE TO AVOID THERISK OF THIS, BUTATWHATCOSTC H A P T E R 11P U B L I C G O OD S A N D C O M M O N RE S O U R C E S 233We can now return to our original example and respond to the town engi-neer. The traffic light reduces the risk of fatality by 0.5 percent. Thus, the ex-pected benefit from having the traffic light is 0.005 ϫ$10 million, or $50,000.This estimate of the benefit well exceeds the cost of $10,000, so you should ap-prove the project.I N T H E N E W SExistence ValueQUICK QUIZ:What is the free-rider problem?N Why does the free-rider problem induce the government to provide public goods?N How should the government decide whether to provide a public good?Common resources, like public goods, are not excludable: They are available free of charge to anyone who wants to use them. Common resources are, however, rival:234PA R T FOU R TH E ECONOMICS OF THE P UBLIC SECTOROne person’s use of the common resource reduces other people’s enjoyment of it.Thus, common resources give rise to a new problem. Once the good is provided,policymakers need to be concerned about how much it is used. This problem is best understood from the classic parable called the Tragedy of the Commons.THE TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONSConsider life in a small medieval town. Of the many economic activities that take place in the town, one of the most important is raising sheep. Many of the town’s families own flocks of sheep and support themselves by selling the sheep’s wool,which is used to make clothing.As our story begins, the sheep spend much of their time grazing on the land surrounding the town, called the Town Common. No family owns the land. In-stead, the town residents own the land collectively, and all the residents are al-lowed to graze their sheep on it. Collective ownership works well because land is plentiful. As long as everyone can get all the good grazing land they want, the Town Common is not a rival good, and allowing residents’ sheep to graze for free causes no problems. Everyone in town is happy.As the years pass, the population of the town grows, and so does the number of sheep grazing on the Town Common. With a growing number of sheep and a fixed amount of land, the land starts to lose its ability to replenish itself. Eventu-ally, the land is grazed so heavily that it becomes barren. With no grass left on the Town Common, raising sheep is impossible, and the town’s once prosperous wool industry disappears. Many families lose their source of livelihood.What causes the tragedy? Why do the shepherds allow the sheep population to grow so large that it destroys the Town Common? The reason is that social and private incentives differ. Avoiding the destruction of the grazing land depends on the collective action of the shepherds. If the shepherds acted together, they could reduce the sheep population to a size that the Town Common can support. Yet no single family has an incentive to reduce the size of its own flock because each flock represents only a small part of the problem.In essence, the Tragedy of the Commons arises because of an externality. When one family’s flock grazes on the common land, it reduces the quality of the land available for other families. Because people neglect this negative externality when deciding how many sheep to own, the result is an excessive number of sheep.If the tragedy had been foreseen, the town could have solved the problem in various ways. It could have regulated the number of sheep in each family’s flock, internalized the externality by taxing sheep, or auctioned off a limited num-ber of sheep-grazing permits. That is, the medieval town could have dealt with the problem of overgrazing in the way that modern society deals with the problem of pollution.In the case of land, however, there is a simpler solution. The town can divide up the land among town families. Each family can enclose its parcel of land with a fence and then protect it from excessive grazing. In this way, the land becomes a private good rather than a common resource. This outcome in fact occurred dur-ing the enclosure movement in England in the seventeenth century.The Tragedy of the Commons is a story with a general lesson: When one per-son uses a common resource, he diminishes other people’s enjoyment of it. Be-cause of this negative externality, common resources tend to be used excessively.Tra g edy of t he C o m m o nsa parable that illustrates whycommon resources get used morethan is desirable from the standpointof society as a wholeThe government can solve the problem by reducing use of the common resource through regulation or taxes. Alternatively, the government can sometimes turn the common resource into a private good.This lesson has been known for thousands of years. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle pointed out the problem with common resources: “What is common to many is taken least care of, for all men have greater regard for what is their own than for what they possess in common with others.”SOME IMPOR TANT COMMON RESOURCESThere are many examples of common resources. In almost all cases, the same prob-lem arises as in the Tragedy of the Commons: Private decisionmakers use the com-mon resource too much. Governments often regulate behavior or impose fees to mitigate the problem of overuse.Clean Air and Water As we discussed in Chapter 10, markets do not ad-equately protect the environment. Pollution is a negative externality that can be remedied with regulations or with Pigovian taxes on polluting activities. One can view this market failure as an example of a common-resource problem. Clean air and clean water are common resources like open grazing land, and excessive pol-lution is like excessive grazing. Environmental degradation is a modern Tragedy of the Commons.O i l P o o l s Consider an underground pool of oil so large that it lies under many properties with different owners. Any of the owners can drill and extract the oil, but when one owner extracts oil, less is available for the others. The oil is a common resource.Just as the number of sheep grazing on the Town Common was inefficiently large, the number of wells drawing from the oil pool will be inefficiently large. Be-cause each owner who drills a well imposes a negative externality on the other owners, the benefit to society of drilling a well is less than the benefit to the owner who drills it. That is, drilling a well can be privately profitable even when it is so-cially undesirable. If owners of the properties decide individually how many oil wells to drill, they will drill too many.To ensure that the oil is extracted at lowest cost, some type of joint action among the owners is necessary to solve the common-resource problem. The Coase theorem, which we discussed in Chapter 10, suggests that a private solution might be possible. The owners could reach an agreement among themselves about how to extract the oil and divide the profits. In essence, the owners would then act as if they were in a single business.When there are many owners, however, a private solution is more difficult. In this case, government regulation could ensure that the oil is extracted efficiently. Congested Roads Roads can be either public goods or common resources. If a road is not congested, then one person’s use does not affect anyone else. In this case, use is not rival, and the road is a public good. Yet if a road is congested, then use of that road yields a negative externality. When one person drives on the road, it becomes more crowded, and other people must drive more slowly. In this case, the road is a common resource.。
曼昆：《微观经济学》第十一章 公共物品和共有资源
第十一章公共物品和共有资源在本章中你将——了解公共物品和共有资源的定义考察为什么私人市场不能生产公共物品考虑我们经济中的一些重要的公共物品说明为什么公共物品的成本—收益分析既是必要的又是困难的考察为什么人们往往会过多的使用共有资源考虑我们经济中一些重要的共有资源一首老歌唱道：“生活中最美好的东西都是免费的。
”稍微思考一下就可以列出这首歌中所提到的物品的长长清单。
有一些东西是大自然提供的，比如，河流、山川、海岸、湖泊和海洋。
政府提供了另一些物品，比如，游览胜地、公园和节庆游行。
在每一种情况下，当人们选择享用这些物品的好处时，并不用花钱。
免费物品向经济分析提出了特殊的挑战。
在我们的经济中，大部分物品是在市场中配置的，买者为得到这些东西而付钱，卖者因提供这些东西而得到钱。
对这些物品来说，价格是引导买者与卖者决策的信号。
但是，当一些物品可以免费得到时，在正常情况下，经济中配置资源的市场力量就不存在了。
在本章中我们考察没有市场价格的物品所引起的问题。
我们的分析将要说明第一章中的经济学十大原理之一：政府有时可以改善市场结果。
当一种物品没有价格时，私人市场不能保证该物品生产和消费的适当数量。
在这种情况下，政府政策可以潜在地解决市场失灵，并增进经济福利。
不同类型的物品在提供人们需要的物品方面，市场如何完美地发挥作用呢？对这个问题的回答取决于所涉及到的物品。
正如我们在第七章中所讨论的，我们可以依靠市场提供有效率的冰激凌卷数量；冰激凌蛋卷的价格调整使供求平衡，而且，这种均衡使生产者和消费者剩余之大化。
但是，正如我们在第十章所讨论的，我们不能依靠市场来阻止铝产品制造者污染我们呼吸的空气：一般情况下市场上的买者与卖者不考虑他们决策的外部效应。
因此，当物品是冰激凌时，市场完美地发挥作用，当物品是清新的空气时，市场的作用很糟。
在考虑经济中的各种物品时，根据两个特点来对物品分类是有用的。
◎物品有排他性吗？可以阻止人们使用这些物品吗？◎物品有竞争性吗？一个人使用这种物品减少了其他人对该物品的享用吗？图11－l用这两个特点把物品分为四类：1．私人物品既有排他性又有竞争性。
曼昆经济学原理微观名词解释9-12(中英)
CHAPTER 9Application: International TradeWorld price: the price of a good that prevails in the world market for that good世界价格:一种物品在世界市场上通行的价格。
Tariff: a tax on goods produced abroad and sold domestically关税:对在国外生产而在国内销售的物品征收的一种税。
CHAPTER 10ExternalitiesExternality: the uncompensated impact of one person’s actions on the well-being of a bystander外部性：一个人的行为对旁观者福利的无补偿的影响Internalizing the externality: altering incentives so that people take into account the external effects of their actions外在性内部化：改变激励，以使人们考虑到自己行为的外部效应Corrective tax: a tax designed to induce private decision makers to take into account the social costs that arise from a negative externality矫正税：旨在引导私人决策者考虑负外部性引起的社会成本的税收Coase theorem: the proposition that if private parties canbargain without cost over the allocation of resources, they can solve the problem of externalities on their own科斯定理：认为如果私人各方可以无成本的就资源配置进行协商，那么他们就可以自己解决外部性问题的观点。
(微观经济学英文课件)Chap11 Public Goods and Common Resources
Excludability
People can be prevented from enjoying the good.(…can you prevent another one to use it?)
Rivalness
One person’s use of the good diminishes another person’s enjoyment of it.
To us?
Some students occupy the seats in the library How to solve traffic jam problem?
Yes
• •
•
Rival?
No
Natural Monopolies
• •
•
Excludable?
NoБайду номын сангаас
Common Resources Public Goods
•
•
•
•
•
•
Harcourt, Inc. items and derived items copyright © 2001 by Harcourt, Inc.
Harcourt, Inc. items and derived items copyright © 2001 by Harcourt, Inc.
The Different Kinds of Goods
group them according to two characteristics: Is the good excludable? Is the good rival?
(微观经济学英文课件）Chap11 Public Goods and Common Resources
微观经济ch11
chapter focuses on public goods and common resources. For both, externalities arise ause something of value has no price attached to it. So, private decisions about consumption and production can lead to an inefficient outcome. Public policy can potentially raise economic well-being.
If
good is not excludable, people have incentive to be free riders, because firms cannot prevent non-payers from consuming the good.
Result: The good is not produced, even if buyers collectively value the good higher than the cost of providing it.
Uncongested toll road: natural monopoly
Congested non-toll road: common resource
Congested toll road: private good
6
THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF GOODS
This
PUBLIC GOODS AND COMMON RESOURCES
What are public goods? What are common resources? Give examples of each. Why do markets generally fail to provide the efficient amounts of these goods? How might the government improve market outcomes in the case of public goods or common resources?
曼昆《经济学原理(微观经济学分册)》(第6版)笔记(第11章 公共物品和公共资源)
曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》（第6版）第11章公共物品和公共资源复习笔记跨考网独家整理最全经济学考研真题，经济学考研课后习题解析资料库，您可以在这里查阅历年经济学考研真题，经济学考研课后习题，经济学考研参考书等内容，更有跨考考研历年辅导的经济学学哥学姐的经济学考研经验，从前辈中获得的经验对初学者来说是宝贵的财富，这或许能帮你少走弯路，躲开一些陷阱。
以下内容为跨考网独家整理，如您还需更多考研资料，可选择经济学一对一在线咨询进行咨询。
一、不同类型的物品1．相关概念：（1）排他性：一种物品具有的可以阻止一个人使用该物品的特性。
（2）消费者的竞争性：一个人使用一种物品将减少其他人对该物品的使用的特性。
（3）私人物品（private goods）：消费中既有排他性又有竞争性的物品。
（4）公共资源：有竞争性但无排他性的物品。
（5）公共物品：既无排他性又无竞争性的物品。
（6）自然垄断：当一种物品在消费中有排他性但没有竞争性时，就是自然垄断的物品。
2．四种类型的物品根据物品的排他性和消费竞争性可以将物品分为四种类型，如图11-1所示。
物品在消费中有没有排他性或竞争性往往是一个程度问题，有时候界限模糊，难以区分。
图11-1 四种类型的物品二、公共物品1．搭便车者问题搭便车者：得到一种物品的利益但避开为此付费的人。
由于公共物品没有排他性，搭便车者问题的存在就使私人市场无法提供公共物品。
但是，政府可以潜在地解决这个问题。
如果政府确信一种公共物品的总利益大于成本，它就可以提供该公共物品，并用税收收入对其进行支付，从而可以使每个人的状况变好。
2．一些重要的公共物品考虑三种重要的公共物品：国防、基础研究、反贫困。
（1）国防国防既无排他性，也无竞争性。
国防是政府应该提供的公共物品。
（2）基础研究基础研究可以通过研究创造出知识。
知识可区分为一般性知识与特定知识：①特定技术知识可以申请专利，专利使发明者创造的知识具有了排他性，这将激励企业拿出资金用于新产品开发的研究中，以便获得专利并出售；②一般性知识是公共物品，既无排他性，也无竞争性，企业往往搭一般知识的便车，很少在上面投资。
曼昆微观经济学第四版关键概念中英文对照
微观经济学关键概念中英文对照CHAPTER 1scarcity稀缺性economics经济学efficiency效率equity平等opportunity cost机会成本rational people理性人marginal changes边际变动incentive激励market economy市场经济property rights产权market failure市场失灵externality外部性market power市场势力productivity生产率inflation通货膨胀business cycle经济周期CHAPTER 2circular-flow diagram循环流向图production possibilities frontier生产可能性边界microeconomics微观经济学macroeconomics宏观经济学positive statements实证表述normative statements规范表述CHAPTER 3absolute advantage绝对优势opportunity cost机会成本comparative advantage比较优势imports进口exports出口CHAPTER 4market市场competitive market竞争市场quantity demanded需求量law of demand需求定理demand schedule需求表demand curve需求曲线normal good正常物品inferior good低档物品substitutes替代品complements互补品quantity supplied供给量law of supply供给定理supply schedule供给表supply curve供给曲线equilibrium均衡equilibrium price均衡价格equilibrium quantity均衡数量surplus过剩shortage短缺law of supply and demand供求定理CHAPTER 5elasticity弹性price elasticity of demand需求价格弹性total revenue总收益income elasticity of demand需求收入弹性cross-price elasticity of demand需求的交叉价格弹性price elasticity of supply供给价格弹性CHAPTER 6price ceiling价格上限price floor价格下限tax incidence税收归宿CHAPTER 7welfare economics福利经济学willingness to pay支付意愿consumer surplus消费者剩余cost成本producer surplus生产者剩余efficiency效率equity平等CHAPTER 8deadweight loss无谓损失CHAPTER 9world price世界价格tariff关税CHAPTER 10externality外部性internalizing the externality外部性的内在化Coase theorem科斯定理transaction costs交易成本corrective tax矫正税CHAPTER 11Excludability排他性rivalry in consumption消费中的竞争性private goods私人物品public goods公有物品common resources公有资源free rider搭便车者cost-benefit analysis成本收益分析Tragedy of the Commons公有地悲剧CHAPTER 12CHAPTER 13total revenue总收益total cost总成本profit利润explicit costs显性成本implicit costs隐性成本economic profit经济利润accounting profit会计利润production function生产函数marginal product边际产量diminishing marginal product边际产量递减fixed costs固定成本variable costs可变成本average total cost平均总成本average fixed cost平均固定成本average variable cost平均可变成本marginal cost边际成本efficient scale有效规模economies of scale规模经济diseconomies of scale规模不经济constant returns to scale规模收益不变CHAPTER 14competitive market竞争市场average revenue平均收益marginal revenue边际收益sunk cost沉没成本CHAPTER 15Monopoly垄断企业natural monopoly自然垄断price discrimination价格歧视CHAPTER 16Oligopoly寡头monopolistic competition垄断竞争collusion勾结cartel卡特尔Nash equilibrium纳什均衡game theory博弈论prisoners＇dilemma囚徒困境dominant strategy占优策略CHAPTER 17monopolistic competition垄断竞争CHAPTER 18factors of production生产要素production function生产函数marginal product of labor劳动的边际产量diminishing marginal product边际产量递减value of the marginal product边际产量值capital资本CHAPTER 19compensating differential补偿性工资差别human capital人力资本union工会strike罢工efficiency wages效率工资discrimination歧视CHAPTER 20poverty rate贫困率poverty line贫困线in-kind transfers实物转移支付life cycle生命周期permanent income持久收入utilitarianism功利主义utility效用liberalism自由主义maximin criterion最大化标准social insurance社会保障libertarianism自由意志主义welfare福利negative income负所得税。
平狄克：微观经济学11 public_goods
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
The Difficult Job of Cost-Benefit Analysis
• Cost benefit analysis refers to a study that compares the costs and benefits to society of providing a public good. • In order to decide whether to provide a public good or not, the total benefits of all those who use the good must be compared to the costs of providing and maintaining the public good.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
CONCLUSION: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS
• Common resources tend to be used excessively when individuals are not charged for their usage. • This is similar to a negative externality.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
• Private Goods
• Are both excludable and rival.
• Public Goods
• Are neither excludable nor rival.
• Common Resources
曼昆的《微观经济学基础》课业笔记 英文版
曼昆的《微观经济学基础》课业笔记英文版IntroductionThis document presents my notes on "Microeconomics: Principles and Applications" by N. Gregory Mankiw. These notes summarize key concepts and ideas covered in the book, aiming to provide a helpful overview of microeconomics.Chapter 1: Ten Principles of Economics- People face trade-offs: individuals and societies must make choices due to scarcity.- The cost of something is what you give up to get it: when making decisions, considering both the direct and opportunity costs is crucial.- Rational people think at the margin: making decisions by evaluating incremental benefits and costs.- People respond to incentives: incentives can influence individuals' behavior and decision-making.- Trade can make everyone better off: voluntary exchange benefits all parties involved.- Markets are usually a good way to organize economic activity: markets coordinate exchanges efficiently.- A country's standard of living depends on its ability to produce goods and services: productivity is key.- Prices rise when the government prints too much money: inflation can be caused by excessive money supply growth.- Society faces a short-run trade-off between inflation and unemployment: the Phillips curve illustrates this trade-off.Chapter 2: Thinking Like an Economist- Economists use models to simplify reality and understand economic behavior.- Assumptions in economic models help focus on essential elements.- Opportunity cost is the true cost of something and is measured by what we give up to obtain it.Chapter 3: Interdependence and the Gains from Trade- Specialization and international trade result in greater production efficiency and consumption possibilities.- Both parties benefit from trade even if one has an absolute advantage in both goods.- Prices reflect the opportunity cost and guide resources to their most valued uses.Chapter 4: The Market Forces of Supply and Demand- Markets consist of buyers and sellers, and their interactions determine prices and quantities.- Demand curve shows the relationship between price and quantity demanded, while supply curve reflects the relationship between price and quantity supplied.- Market equilibrium occurs when quantity demanded equals quantity supplied.- Changes in demand or supply shift their respective curves, leading to changes in equilibrium price and quantity.ConclusionThese notes provide a brief summary of the key concepts covered in "Microeconomics: Principles and Applications." Studying this bookallows for a deeper understanding of microeconomic principles and their applications in the real world.。
曼昆《经济学原理(微观经济学分册)》(第6版)课后习题详解
第14章竞争市场上 的企业
第13章生产成本
第15章垄断
第16章垄断 竞争
第17章寡头
第19章收入与歧视
第18章生产要素市 场
第20章收入不平等 与贫困
第21章消费 者选择理论
第22章微观 经济学前沿
作者介绍
读书笔记
这是《曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》（第6版）课后习题详解》的读书笔记模板，可以替换为自己 的心得。
目录分析
第2章像经济学家 一样思考
第1章经济学十大 原理
第3章相互依存性 与贸易的好处
第5章弹性及其应 用
第4章供给与需求 的市场力量
第6章供给、需求 与政府政策
第8章应用：赋税 的代价
第7章消费者、生 产者与市场效率
第9章应用：国际 贸易
第11章公共物品和 公共资源
第10章外部性
第12章税制的设计
曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分 册）》（第6版）课后习题详解
读书笔记模板
01 思维导图
03 目录分析 05 读书笔记
目录
02 内容摘要 04 作者介绍 06 精彩摘录
思维导图
关键字分析思维导图
习题
教材
消费者
微观经济 学
企业
习题
供给
微观经 济学
经济学
原理
第章
需求
曼昆经济 学பைடு நூலகம்
市场
经济学家
第篇
收入
应用
税制
内容摘要
本书特别适用于参加研究生入学考试指定考研参考书目为曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》的考生， 也可供各大院校学习曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》的师生参考。曼昆的《经济学原理》是世界上最流 行的初级经济学教材，也被众多院校列为经济类专业考研重要参考书目。为了帮助学生更好地学习这本教材，我 们有针对性地编著了它的配套辅导用书（均提供免费下载，免费升级）：1．曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分 册）》（第6版）笔记和课后习题详解（含考研真题）[视频讲解]2．曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》 【教材精讲+考研真题解析】讲义与视频课程【35小时高清视频】3．曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》 （第6版）课后习题详解4．曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》（第5版）课后习题详解5．曼昆《经济学原 理（微观经济学分册）》配套题库【名校考研真题（视频讲解）+课后习题+章节练习+模拟试题】6．曼昆《经济 学原理（宏观经济学分册）》（第6版）笔记和课后习题详解（含考研真题）[视频讲解]7．曼昆《经济学原理 （宏观经济学分册）》【教材精讲+考研真题解析】讲义与视频课程【27小时高清视频】8．曼昆《经济学原理 （宏观经济学分册）》（第6版）课后习题详解9．曼昆《经济学原理（宏观经济学分册）》（第5版）课后习题 详解10．曼昆《经济学原理（宏观经济学分册）》配套题库【名校考研真题（视频讲解）+课后习题+章节练习+ 模拟试题】本书是曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》（第6版）教材的配套e书，参考国外教材的英文答案 和相关资料对曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》（第6版）教材每章的课后习题进行了详细的分析和解答， 并对个别知识点进行了扩展。课后习题答案久经修改，非常标准，特别适合应试作答和临考冲刺。另外，部分高 校，如武汉大学、深圳大学等，研究生入学考试部分真题就来自于该书课后习题，因此建议考生多加重视。
(财务知识)曼昆微观经济学术语表
支付能力原则(ability-to-pay principle) 认为应该根据一个人可以承受的负担来对这个人征税的思想。
绝对优势(absolute advantage) 用比另一个生产者更少的投入生产某种物品的能力。
会计利润(accounting profit) 总收益减总显性成本。
逆向选择(adverse selection) 从无信息买者的角度看，无法观察到的特征混合变为不合意的倾向。
代理人(agent) 一个为另一个人（称为委托人）完成某种行为的人。
阿罗不可能性定理(Arrow’s impossibility theorem) 一个数学结论，它表明在某些假设条件之下，没有一种方案能把个人偏好加总为一组正确的社会偏好。
平均固定成本(average fixed cost) 固定成本除以产量。
平均收益(average revenue) 总收益除以销售量。
平均税率(average tax rate) 支付的总税收除以总收入。
平均总成本(average total cost) 总成本除以产量。
平均可变成本(average variable cost) 可变成本除以产量。
受益原则(benefits principle) 认为人们应该根据他们从政府服务中得到的利益来纳税的思想。
预算约束线(budget constraint) 对消费者可以支付得起的消费组合的限制。
预算赤字( budget deficit) 政府支出大于政府收入。
预算盈余(budget surplus) 政府收入大于政府支出。
经济周期(business cycle) 就业和生产等经济活动的波动。
资本(capital) 用于生产物品与劳务的设备和建筑物。
卡特尔(cartel) 联合起来行事的企业集团。
循环流量图(circular-flow diagram) 一个说明货币如何通过市场在家庭与企业间之间流动的直观经济模型。
科斯定理(Coase theorem) 说明私人各方可以无成本地就资源配置进行协商，那么，他们就可以自己解决外部性问题的一个命题。
曼昆经济学原理(微观部分)第11章公共物品与公共资源
THANKS FOR WATCHING
感谢您的观看
通过合理的排他性定价策略，将 公共物品转变为私人物品，实现
市场交易。
产权明晰
明确公共资源的产权归属，允许 私人部门参与公共物品的生产和
供给。
竞争机制
引入竞争机制，促进公共物品和 公共资源的市场交易，提高资源
配置效率。
非营利组织参与
志愿服务
非营利组织通过志愿服务提供公共物品，满足社 会公益需求。
筹款活动
02 03
过度使用问题
对于一些共同资源，如果缺乏有效的管理，可能会导致资源的过度使用 和枯竭。例如，海洋渔业资源如果不加限制地捕捞，可能会导致渔业资 源的枯竭。
分配不公问题
由于公共物品的特性，消费者对公共物品的消费数量和质量可能存在差 异，这可能导致一些消费者对公共物品的需求得不到满足，而另一些消 费者则可能过度消费。
曼昆经济学原理(微观部分)第11章 公共物品与公共资源
目录
• 引言 • 公共物品 • 公共资源 • 公共物品与公共资源的解决方案 • 案例分析
01 引言
主题概述
公共物品方面具有一些共同特征。
公共物品与公共资源的分类
根据其特性，公共物品和公共资源可以分为不同的类型，如纯公共物品、准公共物品、可 再生公共资源和不可再生公共资源等。
海洋渔业资源
总结词
海洋渔业资源是一种公共资源，其特点 是资源数量有限，但所有者不明确。
VS
详细描述
海洋渔业资源是公共资源的一种，因为它 们是共享的资源，所有沿海国家都可以从 海洋中捕捞鱼类。然而，由于海洋面积广 阔，难以明确界定资源的所有权和使用权 ，导致过度捕捞和渔业资源的枯竭。因此 ，需要采取措施来管理和保护海洋渔业资 源，以确保可持续利用。
曼昆微观经济学英文版11publicgoods
Public goods are neither rival nor excludable.Because people are not charged for their use of public goods, they have an incentive to free ride when the good is provided ernments provide public goods, making quantity decisions based upon cost-benefit analysis.
THE DIFFERENT
KINDS OF GOODS
Four Types of GoodsPrivate GoodsPublic GoodsCommon ResourcesNatural MonopolDS
Private GoodsAre both excludable and rival.Public GoodsAre neither excludable nor mon ResourcesAre rival but not excludable.Natural MonopoliesAre excludable but not rival.
The Free-Rider Problem
Since people cannot be excluded from enjoying the benefits of a public good, individuals may withhold paying for the good hoping that others will pay for it.The free-rider problem prevents private markets from supplying public goods.
曼昆《经济学原理(微观经济学分册)》(第8版)笔记和课后习题(含考研真题)详解
曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》（第8版）笔记和课后习题（含考研真题）详解目录第1篇导言第1章经济学十大原理1.1 复习笔记1.2 课后习题详解1.3 名校考研真题详解第2章像经济学家一样思考2.1 复习笔记2.2 课后习题详解2.3 名校考研真题详解第3章相互依存性与贸易的好处3.1 复习笔记3.2 课后习题详解3.3 名校考研真题详解第2篇市场如何运行第4章供给与需求的市场力量4.1 复习笔记4.2 课后习题详解4.3 名校考研真题详解第5章弹性及其应用5.1 复习笔记5.2 课后习题详解5.3 名校考研真题详解第6章供给、需求与政府政策6.1 复习笔记6.2 课后习题详解6.3 名校考研真题详解第3篇市场和福利第7章消费者、生产者与市场效率7.1 复习笔记7.2 课后习题详解7.3 名校考研真题详解第8章应用：税收的代价8.1 复习笔记8.2 课后习题详解8.3 名校考研真题详解第9章应用：国际贸易9.1 复习笔记9.2 课后习题详解9.3 名校考研真题详解第4篇公共部门经济学第10章外部性10.1 复习笔记10.2 课后习题详解10.3 名校考研真题详解第11章公共物品和公共资源11.1 复习笔记11.2 课后习题详解11.3 名校考研真题详解第12章税制的设计12.1 复习笔记12.2 课后习题详解12.3 名校考研真题详解第5篇企业行为与产业组织第13章生产成本13.1 复习笔记13.2 课后习题详解13.3 名校考研真题详解第14章竞争市场上的企业14.1 复习笔记14.2 课后习题详解14.3 名校考研真题详解第15章垄断15.1 复习笔记15.2 课后习题详解15.3 名校考研真题详解第16章垄断竞争16.1 复习笔记16.2 课后习题详解16.3 名校考研真题详解第17章寡头17.1 复习笔记17.2 课后习题详解17.3 名校考研真题详解第6篇劳动市场经济学第18章生产要素市场18.1 复习笔记18.2 课后习题详解18.3 名校考研真题详解第19章收入与歧视19.1 复习笔记19.2 课后习题详解19.3 名校考研真题详解第20章收入不平等与贫困20.1 复习笔记20.2 课后习题详解20.3 名校考研真题详解第7篇深入研究的论题第21章消费者选择理论21.1 复习笔记21.2 课后习题详解21.3 名校考研真题详解第22章微观经济学前沿22.1 复习笔记22.2 课后习题详解22.3 名校考研真题详解内容简介本书遵循曼昆《经济学原理（微观经济学分册）》（第8版）教材的章目编排，共分7篇22章，每章由三部分组成：第一部分为复习笔记，总结本章的重难点内容；第二部分是课（章）后习题详解，对第8版的所有习题都进行了详解的分析和解答；第三部分为名校考研真题详解，精选近年考研真题，并提供了详细的解答。
曼昆经济学原理英文版教案加习题答案11章PUBLIC GOODS AND COMMON RESOURCES
Common Resources
fish in the ocean
the environment
congested nontoll roads
Public Goods
national defense
knowledge
uncongested nontoll roads
C.The boundary between the categories is sometimes fuzzy. Whether goods are excludable or rival in consumption is often a matter of degree.
why the cost–benefit analysis of public goods is both necessary and difficult.
why people tend to use common resources too much.
some of the important common resources in our economy.
Rival in consumption?
Yes
No
Excludable?
Yes
Private Goods
ice-cream cones
clothing
congested toll roads
Club Goods
fire protection
cable TV
uncongested toll roads
1.Definition ofprivate goods: goods that are both excludable and rival in consumption.
曼昆《微观经济学》答案(英文版)_Chapter_1~5[1]
![曼昆《微观经济学》答案(英文版)_Chapter_1~5[1]](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/c2b43437eefdc8d376ee3296.png)
Chapter 1Problems and Applications1. a. A family deciding whether to buy a new car faces a tradeoff between the cost of thecar and other things they might want to buy. For example, buying the car mightmean they must give up going on vacation for the next two years. So the real costof the car is the family's opportunity cost in terms of what they must give up.b. For a member of Congress deciding whether to increase spending on national parks,the tradeoff is between parks and other spending items or tax cuts. If more moneygoes into the park system, that may mean less spending on national defense or on thepolice force. Or, instead of spending more money on the park system, taxes couldbe reduced.c. When a company president decides whether to open a new factory, the decision isbased on whether the new factory will increase the firm's profits compared to otheralternatives. For example, the company could upgrade existing equipment orexpand existing factories. The bottom line is: Which method of expandingproduction will increase profit the most?d. In deciding how much to prepare for class, a professor faces a tradeoff between thevalue of improving the quality of the lecture compared to other things she could dowith her time, such as working on additional research.2. When the benefits of something are psychological, such as going on a vacation, it isn't easy tocompare benefits to costs to determine if it's worth doing. But there are two ways to think about the benefits. One is to compare the vacation with what you would do in its place. If you didn't go on vacation, would you buy something like a new set of golf clubs? Then you can decide if you'd rather have the new clubs or the vacation. A second way is to think about how much work you had to do to earn the money to pay for the vacation; then you can decide if the psychological benefits of the vacation were worth the psychological cost of working.3. If you are thinking of going skiing instead of working at your part-time job, the cost of skiingincludes its monetary and time costs, plus the opportunity cost of the wages you're giving up by not working. If the choice is between skiing and going to the library to study, then the cost of skiing is its monetary and time costs plus the cost to you of getting a lower grade in your course.4. If you spend $100 now instead of investing it for a year and earning 5 percent interest, youare giving up the opportunity to spend $105 a year from now. The idea that money has a time value is the basis for the field of finance, the subfield of economics that has to do with prices of financial instruments like stocks and bonds.5. The fact that you've already sunk $5 million isn't relevant to your decision anymore, sincethat money is gone. What matters now is the chance to earn profits at the margin. If you spend another $1 million and can generate sales of $3 million, you'll earn $2 million in marginal profit, so you should do so. You are right to think that the project has lost a total of $3 million ($6 million in costs and only $3 million in revenue) and you shouldn't have started it. That's true, but if you don't spend the additional $1 million, you won't have any sales and your losses will be $5 million. So what matters is not the total profit, but the profit you can earn at the margin. In fact, you'd pay up to $3 million to complete development; any more than that, and you won't be increasing profit at the margin.6. Harry suggests looking at whether productivity would rise or fall. Productivity is certainlyimportant, since the more productive workers are, the lower the cost per gallon of potion.Harry wants to look at average cost. But both Harry and Ron are missing the other side of the equation−revenue. A firm wants to maximize its profits, so it needs to examine both costs and revenues. Thus, Hermione is right−it’s best to examine whether the extra revenue would exceed the extra costs. In addition, Hermione is the only one who’s thinking at the margin.7. a. Since a person gets fewer after-tax Social Security benefits the greater is his or herincome, there's an incentive not to save for retirement. If you save a lot, yourincome will be higher, and you won't get as much after-tax Social Security income assomeone who didn't save as much. The unintended consequence of the taxation ofSocial Security benefits is to reduce saving; yet the Social Security system arosebecause of worries that people wouldn’t save enough for retirement.b. For the same reason, you'll tend not to work (or not work as much) after age 65.The more you work, the lower your after-tax Social Security benefits will be. Thusthe taxation of Social Security benefits discourages work effort after age 65.8. a. When welfare recipients who are able to work have their benefits cut off after twoyears, they have greater incentive to find jobs than if their benefits were to lastforever.b. The loss of benefits means that someone who can't find a job will get no income atall, so the distribution of income will become less equal. But the economy will bemore efficient, since welfare recipients have a greater incentive to find jobs. Thusthe change in the law is one that increases efficiency but reduces equity.9. By specializing in each task, you and your roommate can finish the chores more quickly. Ifyou divided each task equally, it would take you more time to cook than it would take your roommate, and it would take him more time to clean than it would take you. By specializing, you reduce the total time spent on chores.Similarly, countries can specialize and trade, making both better off. For example, suppose it takes Spanish workers less time to make clothes than French workers, and French workers can make wine more efficiently than Spanish workers. Then Spain and France can both benefit if Spanish workers produce all the clothes and French workers produce all the wine, and they exchange some wine for some clothes.10. a. Being a central planner is tough! To produce the right number of CDs by the rightartists and deliver them to the right people requires an enormous amount ofinformation. You need to know about production techniques and costs in the CDindustry. You need to know each person's musical tastes and which artists theywant to hear. If you make the wrong decisions, you'll be producing too many CDsby artists that people don't want to hear, and not enough by others.b. Your decisions about how many CDs to produce carry over to other decisions. Youhave to make the right number of CD players for people to use. If you make toomany CDs and not enough cassette tapes, people with cassette players will be stuckwith CDs they can't play. The probability of making mistakes is very high. Youwill also be faced with tough choices about the music industry compared to otherparts of the economy. If you produce more sports equipment, you'll have fewerresources for making CDs. So all decisions about the economy influence yourdecisions about CD production.11. a. Efficiency: The market failure comes from the monopoly by the cable TV firm.b. Equityc. Efficiency: An externality arises because secondhand smoke harms nonsmokers.d. Efficiency: The market failure occurs because of Standard Oil's monopoly power.e. Equityf. Efficiency: There's an externality because of accidents caused by drunk drivers.12. a. If everyone were guaranteed the best health care possible, much more of our nation'soutput would be devoted to medical care than is now the case. Would that beefficient? If you think that currently doctors form a monopoly and restrict healthcare to keep their incomes high, you might think efficiency would increase byproviding more health care. But more likely, if the government mandated increasedspending on health care, the economy would be less efficient because it would givepeople more health care than they would choose to pay for. From the point of viewof equity, if poor people are less likely to have adequate health care, providing morehealth care would represent an improvement. Each person would have a more evenslice of the economic pie, though the pie would consist of more health care and lessof other goods.b. When workers are laid off, equity considerations argue for the unemploymentbenefits system to provide them with some income until they can find new jobs.After all, no one plans to be laid off, so unemployment benefits are a form ofinsurance. But there’s an efficiency problem why work if you can get income fordoing nothing? The economy isn’t o perating efficiently if people remainunemployed for a long time, and unemployment benefits encourage unemployment.Thus, there’s a tradeoff between equity and efficiency. The more generous areunemployment benefits, the less income is lost by an unemployed person, but themore that person is encouraged to remain unemployed. So greater equity reducesefficiency.13. Since average income in the United States has roughly doubled every 35 years, we are likelyto have a better standard of living than our parents, and a much better standard of living than our grandparents. This is mainly the result of increased productivity, so that an hour of work produces more goods and services than it used to. Thus incomes have continuously risen over time, as has the standard of living.14. If Americans save more and it leads to more spending on factories, there will be an increasein production and productivity, since the same number of workers will have more equipment to work with. The benefits from higher productivity will go to both the workers, who will get paid more since they're producing more, and the factory owners, who will get a return on their investments. There's no such thing as a free lunch, though, because when people save more, they're giving up spending. They get higher incomes at the cost of buying fewer goods.15. a. If people have more money, they're probably going to spend more on goods andservices.b. If prices are sticky, and people spend more on goods and services, then output mayincrease, as producers increase output to meet the higher demand rather than raisingprices.c. If prices can adjust, then people's higher spending will be matched with increasedprices, and output won't rise.16. To make an intelligent decision about whether to reduce inflation, a policymaker would needto know what causes inflation and unemployment, as well as what determines the tradeoff between them. Because prices are sticky, an attempt to reduce inflation will lead to higher unemployment. A policymaker thus faces a tradeoff between the benefits of lower inflation compared to the cost of higher unemployment.Chapter 2Problems and Applications1. Many answers are possible.2. a. Steel is a fairly uniform commodity, though some firms produce steel of inferiorquality.b. Novels are each unique, so they are quite distinguishable.c. Wheat produced by one farmer is completely indistinguishable from wheat producedby another.d. Fast food is more distinguishable than steel or wheat, but certainly not as much asnovels.3. See Figure 2-5; the four transactions are shown.Figure 2-54. a. Figure 2-6 shows a production possibilities frontier between guns and butter. It isbowed out because when most of the economy’s resources are being used to pr oducebutter, the frontier is steep and when most of the economy’s resources are being usedto produce guns, the frontier is very flat. When the economy is producing a lot ofguns, workers and machines best suited to making butter are being used to makeguns, so each unit of guns given up yields a large increase in the production of butter;thus the production possibilities frontier is flat. When the economy is producing alot of butter, workers and machines best suited to making guns are being used tomake butter, so each unit of guns given up yields a small increase in the productionof butter; thus the production possibilities frontier is steep.b. Point A is impossible for the economy to achieve; it is outside the productionpossibilities frontier. Point B is feasible but inefficient because it’s inside theproduction possibilities frontier.Figure 2-6c. The Hawks might choose a point like H, with many guns and not much butter. TheDoves might choose a point like D, with a lot of butter and few guns.d. If both Hawks and Doves reduced their desired quantity of guns by the same amount,the Hawks would get a bigger peace dividend because the production possibilitiesfrontier is much steeper at point H than at point D. As a result, the reduction of agiven number of guns, starting at point H, leads to a much larger increase in thequantity of butter produced than when starting at point D.5. See Figure 2-7. The shape and position of the frontier depend on how costly it is to maintaina clean environment the productivity of the environmental industry. Gains inenvironmental productivity, such as the development of a no-emission auto engine, lead to shifts of the production-possibilities frontier, like the shift from PPF1 to PPF2 shown in the figure.Figure 2-76. a. A family’s decision about how much income to save is microeconomics.b. The effect of government regulations on auto emissions is microeconomics.c. The impact of higher saving on economic growth is macroeconomics.d. A f irm’s decision about how many workers to hire is microeconomics.e. The relationship between the inflation rate and changes in the quantity of money ismacroeconomics.7. a. The statement that society faces a short-run tradeoff between inflation andunemployment is a positive statement. It deals with how the economy is, not how itshould be. Since economists have examined data and found that there’s a short-runnegative relationship between inflation and unemployment, the statement is a fact,thus it’s a positive statement.b. The statement that a reduction in the rate of growth of money will reduce the rate ofinflation is a positive statement. Economists have found that money growth andinflation are very closely related. The statement thus tells how the world is, and soit is a positive statement.c. The statement that the Federal Reserve should reduce the rate of growth of money isa normative statement. It states an opinion about something that should be done,not how the world is.d. The statement that society ought to require welfare recipients to look for jobs is anormative statement. It doesn’t state a fact about how the world is. Instead, it is astatement of how the world should be and is thus a normative statement.e. The statement that lower tax rates encourage more work and more saving is apositive statement. Economists have studied the relationship between tax rates andwork, as well as the relationship between tax rates and saving. They’ve found anegative relationship in both cases. So the statement reflects how the world is, andis thus a positive statement.8. Two of the statements in Table 2-2 are clearly normative. They are: “5. If the federalbudget is to be balanced, it should be done over the business cycle rather th an yearly” and “9.The government should restructure the welfare system along the lines of a ‘negative income tax.’” Both are suggestions of changes that should be made, rather than statements of fact, so they are clearly normative statements.The other statements in the table are positive. All the statements concern how the world is, not how the world should be. Note that in all cases, even though they’re statements of fact, fewer than 100 percent of economists agree with them. You could say that positive statements are statements of fact about how the world is, but not everyone agrees about what the facts are.9. As the president, you’d be interested in both the positive and normative views of economists,but you’d probably be most interested in their positive views. Economists are on your staff to provide their expertise about how the economy works. They know many facts about the economy and the interaction of different sectors. So you’d be most likely to call on them about questions of fact posit ive analysis. Since you’re the president, you’re the one who has the make the normative statements as to what should be done, with an eye to the political consequences. The normative statements made by economists represent their views, not necessarily ei ther your’s or the electorate’s.10. There are many possible answers.11. As of this writing, the chairman of the Federal Reserve is Alan Greenspan, the chair of theCouncil of Economic Advisers is Martin N. Baily, and the secretary of the treasury is Larry Summers.12. There are many possible answers.13. As time goes on, you might expect economists to disagree less about public policy becausethey’ll have opportunities to observe different policies that are put into place. As new policies are tried, their results will become known, and they can be evaluated better. It’s likely that the disagreement about them will be reduced after they’ve been tried in practice.For example, many economists thought that wage and price controls would be a good idea for keeping inflation under control, while others thought it was a bad idea. But when the controls were tried in the early 1970s, the results were disastrous. The controls interfered with the invisible hand of the marketplace and shortages developed in many products. As a result, most economists are now convinced that wage and price controls are a bad idea for controlling inflation.But it’s unlikely that the differences between economists will ever be completely eliminated.Economists differ on too many aspects of how the world works. Plus, even as some policies get tried out and are either accepted or rejected, creative economists keep coming up with new ideas.Chapter 3Problems and Applications1. In the text example of the farmer and the rancher, the farmer’s opportunity cost of producingone pound of meat is two pounds of potatoes because for every 20 hours of work, he can produce one pound of meat or two pounds of potatoes. With limited time at his disposal, producing a pound of meat means he gives up the opportunity to produce two pounds of potatoes. Similarly, the rancher’s opportunity cost of producing one pound of meat is 1/8 pound of potatoes because for every hour of work, she can produce one pound of meat or 1/8 pound of potatoes. With limited time at her disposal, producing a pound of meat means she gives up the opportunity to produce 1/8 pound of potatoes.2. a. See Figure 3-2. If Maria spends all five hours studying economics, she can read100 pages, so that is the vertical intercept of the production possibilities frontier. Ifshe spends all five hours studying sociology, she can read 250 pages, so that is thehorizontal intercept. The time costs are constant, so the production possibilitiesfrontier is a straight line.Figure 3-2b. It takes Maria two hours to read 100 pages of sociology. In that time, she couldread 40 pages of economics. So the opportunity cost of 100 pages of sociology is40 pages of economics.3. a.Workers needed to make:One Car One Ton of GrainU.S. 1/4 1/10Japan 1/4 1/5b. See Figure 3-3. With 100 million workers and four cars per worker, if eithereconomy were devoted completely to cars, it could make 400 million cars. Since aU.S. worker can produce 10 tons of grain, if the U.S. produced only grain it wouldproduce 1,000 million tons. Since a Japanese worker can produce 5 tons of grain, ifJapan produced only grain it would produce 500 million tons. These are theintercepts of the production possibilities frontiers shown in the figure. Note thatsince the tradeoff between cars and grain is constant, the production possibilitiesfrontier is a straight line.Figure 3-3c. Since a U.S. worker produces either 4 cars or 10 tons of grain, the opportunity cost of1 car is 2½ tons of grain, which is 10 divided by 4. Since a Japanese workerproduces either 4 cars or 5 tons of grain, the opportunity cost of 1 car is1 1/4 tons of grain, which is 5 divided by 4. Similarly, the U.S. opportunity cost of1 ton of grain is 2/5 cars (4 divided by 10) and the Japanese opportunity cost of 1 tonof grain is 4/5 cars (4 divided by 5). This gives the following table:Opportunity Cost of:1 Car (in terms of tons ofgrain given up) 1 Ton of Grain (in terms ofcars given up)U.S. 2 1/2 2/5Japan 1 1/4 4/5d. Neither country has an absolute advantage in producing cars, since they’re equallyproductive (the same output per worker); the U.S. has an absolute advantage in producing grain, since it’s more productive (greater output per worker).e. Japan has a comparative advantage in producing cars, since it has a loweropportunity cost in terms of grain given up. The U.S. has a comparative advantage in producing grain, since it has a lower opportunity cost in terms of cars given up. f. With half the workers in each country producing each of the goods, the U.S. wouldproduce 200 million cars (that’s 50 million workers times 4 cars each) and 500 million tons of grain (50 million workers times 10 tons each). Japan would produce 200 million cars (50 million workers times 4 cars each) and 250 million tons of grain(50 million workers times 5 tons each).g. From any situation with no trade, in which each country is producing some cars andsome grain, suppose the U.S. changed 1 worker from producing cars to producinggrain. That worker would produce 4 fewer cars and 10 additional tons of grain.Then suppose the U.S. offers to trade 7 tons of grain to Japan for 4 cars. The U.S.will do this because it values 4 cars at 10 tons of grain, so it will be better off if thetrade goes through. Suppose Japan changes 1 worker from producing grain toproducing cars. That worker would produce 4 more cars and 5 fewer tons of grain.Japan will take the trade because it values 4 cars at 5 tons of grain, so it will be betteroff. With the trade and the change of 1 worker in both the U.S. and Japan, eachcountry gets the same amount of cars as before and both get additional tons of grain(3 for the U.S. and 2 for Japan). Thus by trading and changing their production,both countries are better off.4. a. Pat’s opportunity cost of making a pizza is 1/2 gallon of root beer, since she couldbrew 1/2 gallon in the time (2 hours) it takes her to make a pizza. Pat has anabsolute advantage in making pizza since she can make one in two hours, while ittakes Kris four hours. Kris’s opportunity cost of making a pizza is 2/3 gallons ofroot beer, since she could brew 2/3 of a gallon in the time (4 hours) it takes her tomake a pizza. Since Pa t’s opportunity cost of making pizza is less than Kris’s, Pathas a comparative advantage in making pizza.b. Since Pat has a comparative advantage in making pizza, she will make pizza andexchange it for root beer that Kris makes.c. The highest price of pizza in terms of root beer that will make both roommates betteroff is 2/3 gallons of root beer. If the price were higher than that, then Kris wouldprefer making her own pizza (at an opportunity cost of 2/3 gallons of root beer)rather than trading for pizza that Pat makes. The lowest price of pizza in terms ofroot beer that will make both roommates better off is 1/2 gallon of root beer. If theprice were lower than that, then Pat would prefer making her own root beer (she canmake 1/2 gallon of root beer instead of making a pizza) rather than trading for rootbeer that Kris makes.5. a. Since a Canadian worker can make either two cars a year or 30 bushels of wheat, theopportunity cost of a car is 15 bushels of wheat. Similarly, the opportunity cost of abushel of wheat is 1/15 of a car. The opportunity costs are the reciprocals of eachother.b. See Figure 3-4. If all 10 million workers produce two cars each, they produce atotal of 20 million cars, which is the vertical intercept of the production possibilitiesfrontier. If all 10 million workers produce 30 bushels of wheat each, they produce atotal of 300 million bushels, which is the horizontal intercept of the productionpossibilities frontier. Since the tradeoff between cars and wheat is always the same,the production possibilities frontier is a straight line.If Canada chooses to consume 10 million cars, it will need 5 million workers devotedto car production. That leaves 5 million workers to produce wheat, who willproduce a total of 150 million bushels (5 million workers times 30 bushels perworker). This is shown as point A on Figure 3-4.c. If the United States buys 10 million cars from Canada and Canada continues toconsume 10 million cars, then Canada will need to produce a total of 20 million cars.So Canada will be producing at the vertical intercept of the production possibilitiesfrontier. But if Canada gets 20 bushels of wheat per car, it will be able to consume200 million bushels of wheat, along with the 10 million cars. This is shown as pointB in the figure. Canada should accept the deal because it gets the same number ofcars and 50 million more bushes of wheat.Figure 3-46. Though the professor could do both writing and data collection faster than the student (that is,he has an absolute advantage in both), his time is limited. If the professor’s comparative advantage is in writing, it makes sense for him to pay a student to collect the data, since that’s the student’s comparative advantage.7. a. English workers have an absolute advantage over Scottish workers in producingscones, since English workers produce more scones per hour (50 vs. 40). Scottishworkers have an absolute advantage over English workers in producing sweaters,since Scottish workers produce more sweaters per hour (2 vs. 1). Comparativeadvantage runs the same way. English workers, who have an opportunity cost of1/50 sweaters per scone (1 sweater per hour divided by 50 scones per hour), have acomparative advantage in scone production over Scottish workers, who have anopportunity cost of 1/20 sweater per scone (2 sweaters per hour divided by 40 sconesper hour). Scottish workers, who have an opportunity cost of 20 scones per sweater(40 scones per hour divided by 2 sweaters per hour), have a comparative advantagein sweater production over English workers, who have an opportunity cost of 50scones per sweater (50 scones per hour divided by 1 sweater per hour).b. If England and Scotland decide to trade, Scotland will produce sweaters and tradethem for scones produced in England. A trade with a price between 20 and 50scones per sweater will benefit both countries, as they’ll be getting the traded good ata lower price than their opportunity cost of producing the good in their own country.c. Even if a Scottish worker produced just one sweater per hour, the countries wouldstill gain from trade, because Scotland would still have a comparative advantage inproducing sweaters. Its opportunity cost for sweaters would be higher than before(40 scones per sweater, instead of 20 scones per sweater before). But there are stillgains from trade since England has a higher opportunity cost (50 scones per sweater).。
曼昆《经济学原理(微观经济学分册)》(第6版)笔记和课后习题(含考研真题)详解-第11章 公共物品和
第11章 公共物品和公共资源11.1 复习笔记1．物品的分类排他性指一个人使用或消费一种产品或服务时可以阻止其他人使用或消费该种产品和服务的特性；竞争性指一个人使用或消费一种产品或服务时，就减少了其他人使用或消费该种产品和服务的机会。
根据这两个特点可以把物品分为四类：（1）私人物品：既有排他性又有竞争性。
例如，考虑一个冰激凌蛋卷。
一个冰激凌蛋卷之所以有排他性，是因为可以阻止别人吃冰激凌——你只要不把冰激凌蛋卷给别人就行了。
一个冰激凌蛋卷之所以有竞争性，是因为如果一个人吃了一个冰激凌蛋卷，另一个人就不能吃同一个冰激凌蛋卷。
经济中大多数物品都是像冰激凌蛋卷这样的私人物品。
（2）公共物品：既无排他性又无竞争性。
这就是说，不能排除人们使用一种公共物品，而且，一个人享用一种公共物品并不减少另一个人对它的享用。
例如，国防是一种公共物品。
一旦要保卫国家免受外国入侵，就不可能排除任何一个人享有这种国防的好处。
而且，当一个人享受国防的好处时，他并不减少其他任何一个人的好处。
（3）公共资源：有竞争性但无排他性。
例如，海洋中的鱼是一种竞争性物品：当一个人捕到鱼时，留给其他人捕的鱼就少了。
但这些鱼并不是排他性物品，因为几乎不可能对渔民所捕到的鱼收费。
（4）自然垄断的物品：有排他性但无竞争性。
例如，考虑一个小镇中的消防。
要排除享用这种物品是容易的：消防部门只要袖手旁观，让房子烧下去就行了。
但消防并没有竞争性。
消防队员大部分时间在等待发生火灾，因此多保护一所房子并不会减少其他人可以得到的保护。
换句话说，一旦该镇为消防部门付了钱，多保护一所房子的额外成本是微不足道的。
2．公共物品（1）搭便车者问题由于公共物品没有排他性，就会出现搭便车者问题，即人们得到一种物品的利益但并不为此支付。
搭便车者问题排除了私人市场提供公共物品的情况，政府只能通过征税的方式来支付公共物品的成本，使人人都可以获得享用该物品的收益。
（2）成本—收益分析公共物品的成本—收益分析是通过分析社会提供公共物品的成本与收益，从而确定是否提供该物品的一种研究方法。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
Tragedy of the Commons
• The Tragedy of the Commons is a parable that illustrates why common resources get used more than is desirable from the standpoint of society as a whole.
• Private Goods
• Are both excludable and rival.
• Public Goods
• Are neither excludable nor rival.
• Common Resources
• Are rival but not excludable.
• Natural Monopolies
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF GOODS
• When thinking about the various goods in the economy, it is useful to group them according to two characteristics:
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
“The best things in life are free. . .”
• In such cases, government policy can potentially remedy the market failure that results, and raise economic well-being.
• Will the market protect me?
Private Ownership and the Profit Motive!
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
CONCLUSION: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS
• The market fails to allocate resources efficiently when property rights are not wellestablished (i.e. some item of value does not have an owner with the legal authority to control it).
• Common resources tend to be used excessively when individuals are not charged for their usage. • This is similar to a negative externality.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
Public Goods and Common Resource
11
Copyright©2004 South-Western
“The best things in life are free. . .”
• Free goods provide a special challenge for economic analysis. • Most goods in our economy are allocated in markets…
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
CONCLUSION: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS
• Four Types of Goods
• • • • Private Goods Public Goods Common Resources Natural Monopolies
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF GOODS
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
The Free-Rider Problem
• Solving the Free-Rider Problem
• The government can decide to provide the public good if the total benefits exceed the costs. • The government can make everyone better off by providing the public good and paying for it with tax revenue.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
“The best things in life are free. . .”
• When a good does not have a price attached to it, private markets cannot ensure that the good is produced and consumed in the proper amounts.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
COMMON RESOURCES
• Common resources are rival goods because one person’s use of the common resource reduces other people’s use.
• Is the good excludable? • Is the good rival?
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF GOODS
• Excludability
• Excludability refers to the property of a good whereby a person can be prevented from using it.
Some Important Common Resources
• Clean air and water • Congested roads • Fish, whales, and other wildlife
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
CASE STUDY: Why Isn’t the Cow Extinct?
• Rivalry
• Rivalry refers to the property of a good whereby one person’s use diminishes other people’s use.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF GOODS
The Free-Rider Problem
• Since people cannot be excluded from enjoying the benefits of a public good, individuals may withhold paying for the good hoping that others will pay for it. • The free-rider problem prevents private markets from supplying public goods.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
The Difficult Job of Cost-Benefit Analysis
• A cost-benefit analysis would be used to estimate the total costs and benefits of the project to society as a whole.
No
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
PUBLIC GOODS
• A free-rider is a person who receives the benefit of a good but avoids paying for it.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
“The best things in life are free. . .”
• When goods are available free of charge, the market forces that normally allocate resources in our economy are absent.
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
Some Important Public Goods
• National Defense • Basic Research • Fighting Poverty
Copyright © 2004 South-Western
CASE STUDY: Are Lighthouses Public Goods?
• It is difficult to do because of the absence of prices needed to estimate social benefits and resource costs. • The value of life, the consumer’s time, and aesthetics are difficult to assess.
• Are excludable but not rival.