1 / 33

Framework for Comparative Case Study: Welfare Economics

Framework for Comparative Case Study: Welfare Economics . Gabriel M. Telleria Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation Spring 2008 Virginia Tech. The Welfare Economics Approach . What is welfare Economics?

nita
Télécharger la présentation

Framework for Comparative Case Study: Welfare Economics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Framework for Comparative Case Study: Welfare Economics Gabriel M. Telleria Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation Spring 2008 Virginia Tech

  2. The Welfare Economics Approach • What is welfare Economics? • Branch of economics that examines resource allocation and the policies that govern this allocation in terms of societal and/or individual costs and benefits. • One of its objective is to help society make better decisions that maximize its well-being. • Treats values as prices • Cost-benefit (cost effectiveness) type of analysis

  3. Welfare economics aims to answer … • Is an allocation of resources economically efficient? • Is it equitable? (fair) • Is it feasible? • Is it desirable? • What effect does a particular resource allocation have on different groups?

  4. Framework for Comparative Scrutiny • Givens • Contents • Practical Usefulness • Perspective

  5. Givens: Welfare Economics • Positive vs. Normative Economics • The New Welfare Economics • Neoclassical Microeconomic Theory

  6. Positive vs. Normative • Positive economics approach • Analysis based on axioms and observable behavior. • What “is” • Normative Economics • Value judgments in the analysis of resource allocation. • What “should be.” • Welfare economics tends to fall under normative economics in terms of analysis.

  7. The New Welfare Economics Approach • Pareto, Hicks, Kaldor • Differentiates between efficiency and distribution • Pareto efficiency (optimality) • Kaldor-Hicks Compensation tests • Ordinal utility (ranking of commodity bundles using indifference curves)

  8. The Neoclassical Approach • Edgeworth, Sidgwick, Marshall, Pigou • Fundamental Assumptions • Utility is cardinal (scale-measurable) • All individuals have comparable utility functions • Diminishing marginal utility • Social welfare function = sum of all individual welfare functions.

  9. Contents • How do we measure welfare? • Consumer & producer surplus • Pareto optimality • The Edgeworth Box • Methodological Principles • 1st and 2nd fundamental theorems of welfare • The social welfare function • Market failure • Empirical content

  10. How do we measure welfare? • Consumer Surplus • Willingness to pay (WTP) • Producer surplus • Willingness to “sell” (WTS) • Pareto optimality (efficiency) • Social Welfare Function • The Edgeworth Box

  11. Consumer Surplus (WTP) • Individual consumer surplus = net gain from the purchase of a good • Equivalent to the difference between the maximum price a consumer is willing to pay for a good and the actual price paid • Total consumer surplus = the sum of all consumer surpluses gained by all buyers of a good in the market

  12. Consumer surplus = the area above the price and below the demand curve 100 Consumer Surplus 35 P = 35 D 0 400

  13. What happens to consumer surplus when the price of a good/service increases? 100 Consumer Surplus 60 P = 60 35 D 0 270 400

  14. Producer Surplus (WTS) • Producer surplus is the difference between the (market) price a seller actually receives and his/her (seller’s) cost. • A seller would not sell below his/her cost • If the market price is below a seller’s cost the seller will leave the market • Does this always happen?

  15. Producer Surplus and The Market Supply P S 60 P = 60 Producer Surplus 10 0 270

  16. Total Surplus S 100 Consumer Surplus 60 Producer Surplus 10 D 270 0

  17. Pareto Optimality • A resource allocation is said to be Pareto optimal if there is no reallocation of resources that can make one person better-off with out harming some other person. • Pareto optimality usually is the preferred criterion for economist when practicing normative economics. • A Pareto improvement is said to exist if you can reallocate resources and make at least one person better-off without harming any other person.

  18. Pareto Optimality Consumer B Consumer A x2 x2 UB’ UA’ UB UA x1 x1

  19. The Edgeworth Box • Allows you to represent two consumers and there decisions in a single graph. • It represents two different consumers’ consumption of two different goods and the corresponding utility of each.

  20. Edgeworth Box Example x2A Consumer B OB x1B UB UA x1A OA x2B Consumer A

  21. Edgeworth Box and Pareto • Suppose Consumer A and B can consume wheat and guns. • Consumer A and B’s initial allocations are endowment 1. • Let UA and UB represent respectively A and B’s initial indifference curves that intersect with endowment 1. • Can either be made better-off through reallocation of goods?

  22. Edgeworth Box and Pareto Cont. WheatA Consumer B GunsB 15 OB UB 20 • Endowment 1 180 • Endowment 2 Contract Curve • Endowment 3 UA GunsA OA 5 WheatB Consumer A

  23. Edgeworth Box and Pareto Cont. • Endowment 1represents a Pareto dominated allocation. • Endowment 2represents a Pareto improvement allocation. • Endowment 3represents a Pareto optimum allocation. • The Contract Curverepresents all of the Pareto optimal allocations.

  24. Methodological Principles • 1st Fundamental Theorem of Welfare: • Under the competitive setting, market economies will achieve a Pareto optimal point as long as consumers maximize utility and producers maximize profits. • Associated with “efficiency” aspect of Welfare distribution.

  25. Methodological Principles • 2nd Fundamental Theorem of Welfare: • Society can attain any Pareto efficient allocation by suitably redistributing income (or initial resources) and letting people trade freely until the efficient allocation is reached. • Associated with the “fairness” aspect of welfare distribution.

  26. Practical Usefulness • Policy applicability • A useful tool for policy (but with certain limits) • Efficiency vs. fairness • Are all individuals the same? (in terms of utility) • Intangible costs or benefits • Treatment of policy (political actors) • Evaluation of only predetermined set of policy options • Problem-solving adequacy • Effective cost-benefit analysis tool (in some cases) • Progressing or degenerating capabilities • Progress with regards to distributional equity. • NOT THE CASE with political aspects of policy adoption

  27. Perspective • Time • Forward looking (consideration of a set of policy alternatives) • Backward looking (evaluating past performance) • Policy environment is viewed as static. • Discounting favors the present (adequate discount rate?) • Audience • Public officials • Normative Stance • Accepts the distributive status quo as “just” • Treats policy and politics in mere instrumental terms • Political health and survival • Treatment of Conflicting Values • Reduces all values in terms of economic efficiency in monetary terms. • Choices are seen as technical rather than political

  28. Our case study: Smoke Valley Welfare Economics • Problem: What is the optimal air pollution control policy for Smoke Valley? • Analysis limited to policy options pertaining to industrial point source pollution. • Addressing only two types of policies

  29. Policy Type A: Regulatory Status Quo for Point Sources • A Cost-benefit analysis • Need to interpret air pollution in terms of its impact on well being • Amenity of clean air and health of individuals • Monetary assessment of future benefits

  30. Policy Type B: System of Standards and Charges • Whatever level of abatement, this type is policy is the least-cost way. • Decisions in the hands of enterprises rather than regulators • Assumption that managers are better informed (equipped) to make decisions regarding their most efficient level of pollution. • Creation of proper incentives for polluters • Lower administrative costs (no time consuming case by case battles)

  31. Results of the Study • Policy type B (System of Standards and Charges) recommended by team. • Recommendation receives mixed reviews • Trial and error system of determining optimal pollution level unsatisfactory. • Burden of cleanup concentrated on the efficient polluters • Low income residents argue abatement does not favor them. • System is a moral equivalent of a “license to pollute” • Long-term ecological effects • EPA regards study as a threat to its regulatory authority.

  32. What happened? • Market failure • Nonexistence of markets • The political consideration • Information failure (asymmetric information) • Externalities (both present and future) • Public goods • Who should bear the burden? • Morality • Who decides morality? • The proper role of government • Should “bads” be a market good?

  33. Questions or comments? • Thank you.

More Related