Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Fei–Ranis model of economic growth wikipedia , lookup
General equilibrium theory wikipedia , lookup
Comparative advantage wikipedia , lookup
Grey market wikipedia , lookup
Externality wikipedia , lookup
Market (economics) wikipedia , lookup
Supply and demand wikipedia , lookup
Public good wikipedia , lookup
Production, Rents and Social Surplus Keep reading Weimer &Vining Last Week’s Objectives: The model: The concept of a perfectly competitive economy The virtues and limits of the competitive market model Utility and “consumer behavior” The concept(s) of efficiency – Indifference Maps – Pareto Optimality – Potential Pareto Optimality Competitive Markets and Efficiency The “rationale” for government intervention This week: The Behavior of Producers Rents: Monopolistic and Competitive Behavior Changes in Producer Surplus Social Surplus -- the larger story Analysis Example: A Producer Tax Social Surplus and Efficiency Beginning Public Goods Discussion of organ transplant policy Producer Behavior in a Competitive Market A perfectly competitive market consists of firms that produce identical products that sell at the same price. Each firm’s volume of output is so small in comparison to the overall market demand that no single firm has an impact on the market price. Premises/Assumptions of the behavior of producers – Motivated by profit-seeking Unprofitable firms tend to disappear – Based on a given set of technologies, however: Technological innovation leads to temporary edge The Dynamism of technology – This temporary edge leads to Rents: economic profits Individual Firm Behavior: Marginal and Average Costs = Total Cost = Profit MC > AC; Rents (temporarily) accrued $ Ps MC MC and AC are equal; No Rents accrued ACs PL QL Output (Q) per unit of Time Qs AC Rents and the Idealized Market With no constraints on the number of firms that can arise to produce each good, the Pareto Efficient equilibrium in the idealized competitive model is characterized by zero profits for all firms. Economic profits are called rents. Over the long run we expect rents to disappear. Only if some circumstance prevents the entry of new firms will rents persist. Therefore, we expect the dynamic process of profit seeking to move the economy toward the competitive ideal. To better understand this concept, it is useful to contrast pricing in a monopolistic industry with one that is competitive. Individual Firm Behavior: A Case of Monopoly Supply Transfer from consumers To producers Lost consumer surplus $ MC AC PM Lost “producer Surplus” PC D ACM QC QM Output (Q) per unit of Time MR Unexpended Resources Aggregate Supply Schedules The Competitive Case In competitive markets – – – Many firms with roughly the same capabilities Demand is essentially unaffected by the production of any single firm Firms respond to observed price Producer Surplus Loss Supply Schedule P3 P2 P1 Quantity Produced The Larger Picture: Social Surplus Market-clearing price Supply Schedule Consumer Surplus P1 Demand Schedule Producer Surplus Q1 Quantity per unit of Time Social Surplus = Consumer + Producer Surplus Analysis: Social Surplus, A Tax on Producers S2 Tax revenue Deadweight loss Size of Tax S1 P2 P1 D Q2 Q1 Quantity per unit of Time Summary Social surplus analysis captures... – Changes in “compensating variation” for consumers (Consumer surplus) – Changes in rents (producer surplus) Idealized Competitive Markets produce Pareto efficient allocations of goods and services – No one can be made better off w/out making someone else worse off – Social surplus is maximized – Market operation is decentralized – Pareto efficiency arises through voluntary actions without any need for public policy Hence the ICM provides an analytic “baseline” – Are there departures for the ICM that would result in inefficient allocations of goods and services? – What policy options can address such departures? Moving forward… Idealized competitive market framework is useful for thinking about efficiency – and therefore our Pareto criterion. So what happens when equilibrium market behavior fails to maximize social surplus? We call these situations the traditional market failures. – – – – Public goods Externalities Natural monopolies Information asymmetries Public Goods Attributes of Public Goods – – – Classifying Public Goods – – – – Rivalry: What one consumes cannot be consumed by another. Excludability: One has control over use of the good. Congestion: level of demand at a particular supply ~ Private Goods Toll Goods Free/Common Property Goods Pure public Goods Implications for Public Policy Attributes of the Good Rivalry – – If I consume it, can you? Pizza? Weather information? Wilderness? Excludability – – – Can you keep me from using it? Your car? The view from your back yard? The words to the song you write? Don’t forget about attenuated property rights Theft, ambiguity, custom, changes in legal status Attributes of the Good, Continued Congestable? – Does an additional unit of consumption within the relevant range diminish the benefit from other units of consumption? Hiking in the wilderness Traffic Cutting-edge fashion (“Yuck! -- they’re even doing it in the suburbs!”) Combinations of attributes of the good indicate the characteristics of the public policy problem. A Classification of Goods Rivalrous Pure private goods Soap, beer, ... Congested: Non-Excludable Externality MC>price Over-consumption Free Goods Supply>demand at zero price Non-Rivalrous Toll goods No provision at efficient price ($0); underCongested: consumption Toll goods if P>0 with crowding -- parking Pure (‘classic’) public goods Congested: Common property goods Private supply unlikely Congested: Ambient Public good