Why public goods are a pedagogical bad
AbstractThe concept of public goods is confusing because it confounds three analytically distinct concepts: excludability, rivalry, and public finance. Pure public goods are of limited relevance as an explanation of government spending. To make matters worse, the broader policy community uses the term in ways that invoke different means of both public and good than economists favour. For example, global public goods describe everything from the global environment, international financial stability and market efficiency, to health, knowledge, peace and security and humanitarian rights. In this essay, I argue for radically reducing the emphasis placed on public goods in the standard undergraduate public finance curriculum, and instead emphasizing the fundamental underlying issues of exclusion, rivalry, and public finance/provision. The ultimate aim of an undergraduate course in public expenditure should, I argue, be to explain government spending.
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 InfoPaper provided by Carleton University, Department of Economics in its series Carleton Economic Papers with number 06-06.
Length: 28 pages
Date of creation: 08 Aug 2006
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published: Carleton Economic Papers
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa Ontario, K1S 5B6 Canada
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2007-03-31 (All new papers)
- NEP-KNM-2007-03-31 (Knowledge Management & Knowledge Economy)
- NEP-PBE-2007-03-31 (Public Economics)
- NEP-PUB-2007-03-31 (Public Finance)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Myles,Gareth D., 1995. "Public Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521497695, April.
- Zhiqi Chen & Frances Woolley, 1999.
"A Cournot-Nash Model of Family Decision Making,"
Carleton Economic Papers
99-13, Carleton University, Department of Economics, revised Oct 2001.
- Marc Bilodeau & Al Slivinski, .
"Toilet Cleaning and Department Chairing: Volunteering a Public service,"
- Bilodeau, Marc & Slivinski, Al, 1996. "Toilet cleaning and department chairing: Volunteering a public service," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 299-308, February.
- Bilodeau, M. & Slivinsky, A., 1994. "Toilet Cleaning and Department Chairing: Volunteering a public service," Cahiers de recherche 94-01, Departement d'Economique de la Faculte d'administration à l'Universite de Sherbrooke.
Blog mentionsAs found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
- Firefighting is not a public good
by Frances Woolley in Worthwhile Canadian Initiative on 2010-10-06 19:11:39
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Renee Lortie).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.