Pure Public Goods versus Commons: Benefit-Cost Duality
AbstractThis paper utilizes benefit-cost duality to differentiate the problems associated with a pure public good from the problems associated with a commons. For the public good scenario, contributors’ benefits are public or available to all, while provision costs impact only the contributor. In a commons, crowding costs are public, while benefits affect only the user. Although both problems possess the same game form for their canonical representations, collective-action implications differ: for example, the relative positions of the Nash equilibrium and Pareto optimum, the form of the exploitation hypothesis, and the need for selective incentives or punishments.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by University of Wisconsin Press in its journal Land Economics.
Volume (Year): 79 (2003)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://le.uwpress.org/
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
- D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Edgardo Barandiarán, 2003. "Protecting Property from Stationary Bandits," Latin American Journal of Economics-formerly Cuadernos de Economía, Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 40(121), pages 626-632.
- Robert H. Hicks & Alan C. Haynie & Kurt E. Schnier, 2008.
"Common Property, Information, and Cooperation: Commercial Fishing in the Bering Sea,"
80, Department of Economics, College of William and Mary.
- Haynie, Alan C. & Hicks, Robert L. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2009. "Common property, information, and cooperation: Commercial fishing in the Bering Sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 406-413, December.
- Kate Ivanova, 2007. "Corruption, illegal trade and compliance with the Montreal Protocol," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(4), pages 475-496, December.
- Paul J. Ferraro & Michael K. Price, 2011.
"Using Non-Pecuniary Strategies to Influence Behavior: Evidence from a Large Scale Field Experiment,"
NBER Working Papers
17189, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Paul J. Ferraro & Michael K. Price, 2013. "Using Nonpecuniary Strategies to Influence Behavior: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(1), pages 64-73, March.
- Bardhan, Pranab & Ghatak, Maitreesh & Karaivanov, Alexander, 2007. "Wealth inequality and collective action," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(9), pages 1843-1874, September.
- Michael Finus & Raoul Schneider & Pedro Pintassilgo, 2011. "The Incentive Structure of Impure Public Good Provision – The Case of International Fisheries," Discussion Papers 1103, Exeter University, Department of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.