IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/vhsuwp/2009_087.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Buchanan-Kooperation und Internationale Oeffentliche Gueter

Author

Listed:
  • Rundshagen, Bianca

    () (The FernUniversitaet / University of Hagen)

  • Zimmermann, Klaus W.

    () (Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

Abstract

In this contribution, James Buchanan's model of the voluntary provision of public goods is formalized and applied to the case of a rich and poor actor which also can be inter-preted as industrialized and developing countries in the debate on global environmental goods. Concerning the utility functions of these actors, two scenarios are being analyzed: Whereas in the neutrality-case the marginal gross utility of the public good is strictly positive for both actors, an excessive production of it leads to undesired consequences in the repercussion-case implying that the marginal gross utility of one actor becomes negative as soon as his/her saturation level is trespassed. It is assumed that the consumer of the good is able to influence the quantity of the good supplied by transfer payments leading to two kinds of co-operation: a positive co-operation to increase the quantity and a negative co-operation to reduce it. It can be shown for a given assignment of the roles as producer and consumer that in both cases there will always be a socially optimal level of production implying that there isn't any collective-good-problem as far as decisions are rational and not influenced by emotions like envy or malevolence. However, there is always a conflict of interests regarding the assignment of roles: in the repercussion-case both actors prefer being a producer as soon as the marginal costs become sufficiently low and vice versa, in the neutrality-case both actors strive for the consumer role independent from the level of the marginal costs. Since in the Buchanan-model only the consumer realizes the gains from co-operation, we have to ask how a burden-sharing arrangement should look like which can be considered as just. Here, two alternative financing rules are proposed: in the first alternative, the financing share of an actor or country is determined by the specific part of the total consumer rents it enjoys whereas in the second alterna-tive, known as Lindahl-pricing, the share of the costs corresponds to the relative marginal utility. It is shown for both variants that with decreasing marginal costs of production there should be a reallocation of the burden towards the rich actor or country. Finally, the introduction of distributional constraints into the allocative decisions leads to a decisive worsening in the supply of the public good.

Suggested Citation

  • Rundshagen, Bianca & Zimmermann, Klaus W., 2009. "Buchanan-Kooperation und Internationale Oeffentliche Gueter," Working Paper 87/2009, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:vhsuwp:2009_087
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hsu-hh.de/fgvwl/index_1fIb9ZOaiso8qequ.html
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annick Laruelle & Mika Widgrén, 1998. "Is the allocation of voting power among EU states fair?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 317-339, March.
    2. Sutter, Matthias, 2000. "Flexible Integration, EMU and Relative Voting Power in the EU," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 104(1-2), pages 41-62, July.
    3. Leech, Dennis, 2002. "Designing the Voting System for the Council of the European Union," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 113(3-4), pages 437-464, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Oeffentliche Gueter; internationale Koorperation; Verhandlungen;

    JEL classification:

    • F50 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - General
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • N40 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation - - - General, International, or Comparative

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:vhsuwp:2009_087. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Klaus Bekcmann). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/egbwhde.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.