This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Does public service broadcasting serve the public? The future of television in the changing media landscape

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Machiel van Dijk
Richard Nahuis
Daniël Waagmeester

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The media landscape is subject to substantial technological change. In this Discussion Paper, we analyse how technological trends affect the economic rationale for PSB. After identifying the aims and nature of PSB, we derive eight possible market failures from the specific economic characteristics of information. The changing relevance of these market failures is subsequently discussed in the light of the technological changes. Based on this analysis, we argue that public service broadcasting (PSB) for the digital age should be light in the sense that it has a much smaller mandate. The main reason for this conclusion is that, due to technological developments, many market failures in the broadcasting industry are no longer relevant. The broadcasting market thus functions more and more like a normal market. This implies that the allocation tends to the efficient outcome, as long as consumer valuation is properly accounted for. This is not the case when there are externalities and possibly not when it comes to valuing quality. In the presence of these market failures, an efficient allocation is not warranted in the broadcasting industry. It is these remaining market failures that give a future PSB a right to exist.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cpb.nl/eng/pub/cpbreeksen/discussie/43/disc43.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis in its series CPB Discussion Papers with number 43.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Apr 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:43

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Postbus 80510, 2508 GM Den Haag
Phone: (070) 338 33 80
Fax: (070) 338 33 50
Email:
Web page: http://www.cpb.nl/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: ().

Related research
Keywords: Media media policy public service broadcasting market failure

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
L3 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise
H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
  1. Barry Nalebuff, 2000. "Competing Against Bundles," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm157, Yale School of Management. [Downloadable!]
  2. Hansen, Claus Thustrup & Kyhl, Soren, 2001. "Pay-per-view broadcasting of outstanding events: consequences of a ban," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 589-609, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Sendhil Mullainathan & Andrei Shleifer, 2005. "The Market for News," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1031-1053, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Frederik Huizinga & Peter Broer, 2004. "Wage moderation and labour productivity," CPB Discussion Papers 28, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis. [Downloadable!]
  5. N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Bourreau, Marc, 2003. "Mimicking vs. counter-programming strategies for television programs," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 35-54, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Peter Mulder & Henri Groot, 2007. "Sectoral Energy- and Labour-Productivity Convergence," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(1), pages 85-112, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Richard Nahuis & Paul Tang, . "Strategic competition with public infrastructure: Ineffective and Unwelcome?," CPB Discussion Papers 8, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis. [Downloadable!]
  9. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2003. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," Virginia Economics Online Papers 358, University of Virginia, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  10. Akerlof, George A, 1970. "The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Richard Nahuis & Ashok Parikh, . "Factor Mobility and Regional Disparities: East, West, Home's Best?," CPB Discussion Papers 4, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  12. Steven T. Berry & Joel Waldfogel, 1999. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency in Radio Broadcasting," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(3), pages 397-420, Autumn. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  13. Massimo Motta & Michele Polo, 1997. "Concentration and public policies in the broadcasting industry: the future of television," Economic Policy, CEPR, CES, MSH, vol. 12(25), pages 293-334, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  14. Henri de Groot, . "On the Optimal Timing of Reductions of CO2 Emissions," CPB Discussion Papers 1, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis. [Downloadable!]
  15. Avinash Dixit & Victor D. Norman, 1979. "Advertising and Welfare: Reply," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(2), pages 728-729, Autumn. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Spence, A Michael & Owen, Bruce, 1977. "Television Programming, Monopolistic Competition, and Welfare," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 103-26, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. Frank Windmeijer & Eric de Laat & Rudy Douven & Esther Mot, 2006. "Pharmaceutical promotion and GP prescription behaviour," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1), pages 5-18. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  18. Yannis Bakos & Erik Brynjolfsson, 1997. "Bundling Information Goods: Pricing, Profits and Efficiency," Working Paper Series 199, MIT Center for Coordination Science. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? No RePEc service, like IDEAS, charges for the use or the display of bibliographic data.

This page was last updated on 2008-8-13.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.