Voting on public goods in multi-jurisdictional systems

This paper studies an economy with multiple jurisdictions, each producing a (pure) public good. Decisions are taken by means of a centralized voting procedure, to which individual agents participate and whose rules are defined with respect to the jurisdictional structure. In particular, a winning alternative must gain the support of a given number of jurisdictions. A well-known example is qualified majority rules. We establish condition on voting rules for the set of voting equilibria to coincide with the set of ratio equilibria of the economy, under alternative assumptions on the possibility of transfers across jurisdictions. We employ the obtained results to characterize the equilibria of two-stage voting situations, in which jurisdictional delegates vote instructed by internal committees.     

The theory of public goods: non-nash behaviour

Most treatments of equilibrium public goods provision assume zero conjectural variations in the sense that each individual regards the behaviour of the rest of the community as independent of his own. This paper introduces nonzero conjectural variations into the model. A diagram is introduced which can depict both the individual's and the community's equilibrium in the presence of nonzero conjectural variations. Equilibrium and optimal outcomes are compared, and a specific functional form is used to investigate the effect of community size on the nature of equilibrium. Finally, we discuss the requirement that conjectures should be consistent.     

The theory of public goods: Misplaced emphasis?

The note takes up for critical examination the tendency in the modern theory of public goods to emphasize the problem of correct revelation or concealment of preferences. It is argued that a strategy which consists in playing down one's preferences for a public good in order to get a lower share in the costs of providing the good is not likely to succed in an open political decision-making process involving elected representatives. This conclusion is supported by the fact that there seems to be little empirical evidence which shows the importance of the preference revelation issue.     

Fairness in the contingent valuation of environmental public goods: attitude toward paying for environmental improvements at two levels of scope

Respondents to contingent valuation (CV) surveys give a variety of reasons for not wanting to pay money. This variability is likely to reflect people's attitudes toward paying for the public good change, their attitudes toward paying for public goods in general, and a component that is independent of these attitudes but unique to particular beliefs about paying (e.g. ‘I can't afford to pay’). Negative attitudes toward paying can contribute to an apparent insensitivity to different levels of the same public good. In a telephone survey, northern Wisconsin property owners were asked about their WTP for four environmental public goods (biodiversity, Indian spearfishing, water quality, and wolves) at two levels of scope (part and whole). For water quality and spearfishing, the part was a chain of lakes that was geographically nested within a larger region of lakes. Similarly, the biodiversity whole represented a region comprising the smaller level of the public good. The scope conditions for wolves were quantitatively nested levels of returning 300 and 800 wolves to northern Wisconsin. Respondents’ beliefs about paying for each public good and level of scope were measured in order to test their generality across the different public goods and levels of scope. Negative attitudes toward paying that are general across public goods place restrictions on the use of CV for environmental public goods. However, negative attitudes that are tied to specific environmental public goods suggest that the valuation method might be difficult to implement in these cases only. Moreover, negative attitudes toward paying that are either general or specific may contribute to perfect embedding when they are expressed across different levels of scope for the same public good. Respondents' beliefs about paying for each public good were associated with an attitude toward paying for the respective good and an attitude toward paying for public goods in general at both levels of scope. The general attitude was more explanatory of beliefs about paying for wolf reintroduction and spearfishing than were the specific attitudes. The distribution of beliefs was sensitive to the type of good being valued, but less so to the scope of the public good change. Contingent valuation practitioners should seek improvements in respondents' perceptions of the fairness of the valuation process in order to facilitate citizens' involvement in decisions about environmental public goods. Avenues for future research are proposed and discussed.     

The Italian approach to the theory of public goods *

Abstract

The subject of needs is the centre of attention of Italian public finance scholars. The financial activity of the State is justified by the existence of collective or public needs to whose satisfaction collective or public goods and services are linked. Italian economists have studied the problems of public goods in a general context, taking into consideration concurrently both taxes and public expenditure and giving prominence to positive analysis. Italian theorists have always been far removed from the classical approach, which denies the productivity of public services, and have deemed it necessary to take into account the political context in which fiscal structures operate. Their models include the State as a major factor. Herein lies the main value of the Italian tradition in public finance, which puts in coercion into the market mechanism via State intervention.     

The optimistic stability of the core mapping in public goods production economies

Summary We show that in a production economy with public goods and a measure space of agents an allocation belongs to the core of the economy if and only if there exists no allocation in the core of a subeconomy that blocks it.We are indebted to Yossi Greenberg for very helpful suggestions, especially concerning the introduction of this work. We would also like to thank the referee for useful suggestions. Part of this work was done while the authors were visiting CORE, Université Catholique de Louvain. The support of CORE is gratefully acknowledged.     

Foreign aid and weakest-link international public goods: An experimental study

In this paper, we investigate efficiency differences between income and in-kind transfers as distribution mechanisms of foreign aid to weakest-link international public goods in a laboratory environment. We find that if there is relatively small difference in country size, then income transfers seem to provide a higher provision of the international public good, and thus higher overall welfare level than that of in-kind transfers. However, if there is a large disparity in country size, then in-kind transfers appear to provide a higher level of IPG provision and higher accompanying global welfare.     

Learning dynamics for mechanism design: An experimental comparison of public goods mechanisms

In a repeated-interaction public goods economy, incomplete information and dynamic behavior may affect the realized outcomes of mechanisms known to be efficient in a complete information one-shot game. An experimental test of five public goods mechanisms indicates that subjects with private information appear to best respond to recent observations. This provides predictions about which mechanisms will generate convergence to their efficient equilibrium allocations. These predictions match the experimental result that globally stable efficient mechanisms realize the highest efficiency in practice. The simplicity of the suggested best response model makes it useful in predicting stability of mechanisms not yet tested.     

Observable preferences for public goods

This paper discusses the circumstances under which it is possible to use the market or aggregate demand functions generated from individual utility maximization to obtain consumers' preferences for certain classes of public goods, and thus obtain the information needed to satisfy the Samuelsonian efficiency conditions for these public goods. The restrictions on the preferences of all consumers which are sufficient to use the aggregate demand function are: (i) there exists a price vector such that the level of public good provisiion is valueless, and (ii) the marginal rate of substitution of the private good price for the level of public good provision is independent of income.     

An experimental comparison of collective choice procedures for excludable public goods

This paper compares three collective choice procedures for the provision of excludable public goods under incomplete information. One, serial cost sharing (SCS), is budget balanced, individually rational, anonymous and strategy proof. The other two are “hybrid” procedures: voluntary cost sharing with proportional rebates (PCS) and with no rebates (NR). PCS satisfies all these properties except strategy proofness, and NR satisfies all the properties except for strategy proofness and budget balance. However, PCS and NR do not exclude any potential users, and they do not require equal cost shares, thereby overcoming the two main sources of inefficiency with SCS. We characterize the Bayesian Nash equilibria (BNE) of the hybrid mechanisms and conduct laboratory experiments to compare the performance of the three mechanisms. We find that PCS produces significantly more efficient allocations than either SCS or NR.     

Gorman and Musgrave are dual: An Antipodean theorem on public goods

This paper examines the conditions under which the ‘allocation branch’ of the government can determine the optimum provision of public goods independently of the distribution of private goods. We draw attention to the duality with the literature on aggregation over consumers private goods economies.     

An experimental dynamic public goods game with carryover

We examine voluntary contributions in a two-stage public good experiment with ‘carryover.’ In two treatments, each subject's second-stage endowment is determined by the return from the public good in the first-stage. We manipulate payoffs across treatments such that, relative to our no-carryover baseline, earnings from either Nash Equilibrium (constant NE) play or Pareto Optimal (constant PO) play are held constant. The remaining two treatments maintain a constant endowment in each stage, but vary the marginal per capita return (MPCR high or MCPR low) to contributions in the second-stage. Our results indicate that carryover increases first-stage contributions. Our implementation of carryover enables us to examine the effects of changing endowments and a wide range of MPCR's. Consistent with the literature, we find that MPCR and endowment effects are important determinants of subject contributions to the group account. While stage 1 contributions tend to increase in the presence of carryover, efficiency levels across both stages fall relative to the baseline. Efficiency levels fall because the maximum earnings possible increase with carryover (due to higher endowments or MPCR levels in stage 2).     

Consistent conjectures and voluntary contributions to public goods: why the conventional theory does not work

The conventional theory of voluntary contributions to public goods assumes that each person maximises his utility taking other people's behaviour as given (Nash conjectures). It is now coming to be recognised that this theory is inconsistent with observed behaviour. This paper argues that the problems of the theory are compounded — and not, as some economists have argued, resolved — by relaxing the assumption of Nash conjectures. If individuals' conjectures are consistent, each person will hold the (correct) belief that other people's contributions are inversely related to his own. Under most reasonable assumptions, equilibrium is a state in which no-one contributes anything.     

Power and public goods

A game-theoretic analysis using the Harsanyi-Shapley nontransferable utility value indicates that the choice of public goods in a democracy is not affected by who has voting rights. This is corroborated by an independent economic argument based on the implicit price of a vote.     

Technology and public goods

This paper presents a theory of public goods based on production theory where public goods are viewed as inputs to the production process. We examine the pure case of public inputs (no private inputs) as well as the mixed case (private and public inputs). We show how the case of public inputs is related to certain forms of nonjoint production, and we characterize it in terms of variable profit and joint cost functions. Comparative statics results are derived graphically in the two-by-two case.     

公共池塘资源自主治理理论与我国农村社区公共产品治理的研究

埃莉诺·奥斯特罗姆的公共池塘资源自主治理理论完善了准公共产品理论,结合社会资本因素的集体行动及制度供给理论给我们提供了研究农村社区公共产品供给及治理新的视角。基于此,在简要回顾目前国内农村社区公共产品治理研究及其不足之处的基础上,借鉴公共池塘资源自主治理理论,提出今后我国农村社区公共产品治理研究中需要进一步加强研究的内容及方向,以促进农村公共事业的可持续发展。