DOCSLIB.ORG

Notes on Externalities.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Notes on Externalities.Pdf WELLESLEY COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS ECONOMICS 101 JOHNSON Review Notes on Externalities Here, we briefly review the welfare analysis of externalities, with tables for each ofthe cases. Note here that we've drawn cases for which the marginal externality benefit or cost is not constant (thus the MSC or MSB curve is not drawn parallel to the S or D curve), but the internalization policy will still be the same: tax markets with negative externalities to reach Q efficient/optimal and subsidize markets with positive externalities to reach Q efficient/optimal. Don't be too concerned with putting price lines in for the consumer's and producer's prices in each case. Concentrate more on the idea that I might consider reducing the SlJM of CS + PS + GR in exchange for either a greatef increase in externality benefit or a greater reduction in externality cost. In both cases, government action can increase TOTAL SS ( CS + PS + GR + Externality Effects) by having the market participants take those external effects into account. Enjoy! An externaHt)' is an effect on someone's well-being for which no compensation is provided in the market. Pollution constitutes a negative (or detrimental) externality. Planting a beautiful garden in onels front yard produces a positive (or beneficial) externality. The marsinal social cost ofproducing a good consists ofthe cost to the producer ~ the cost of any extemaHties that affect society. Marginal private cost is shown by the supply curve. The marginal social cost curve is obtained by taking the relevant supply curve and adding the marainal cost ofthe externality vertically at each Qyantity. (Note that this marginal cost may be different at different quantities.) The marsinal social benefit ofconsuming a good consists ofthe gain to the consumer JIli.nys the cost ofany externalities that affect the rest ofsociety. Marginal private benefit is shown by the demand curve. The marginal social benefit curve is obtained by taking the relevant demand curve and adding the marainal benefit ofthe externality vertically at each Quantity. Neiative production Externalitjes As an example, consider The Daily Catch restaurant, which can prod~ce great calamari, but only by causing the whole street to reek offish and garlic. This means that the marginal social cost curve for calamari will be higher than the supply curve at all points, since the cost to the restaurant ofproducing calamari does not take into account the effect ofthe bad smell on other people. The difference may be greater for small amounts ofcalamari, since once the street reeks adding a little more smell doesn't make things much worse. MSC P S -MPC MARGINAL COST OF ETERNALITY AT 0' o 0' NEGATIVE PRODUCTION EXTERNALITY Social surplus is maximized at the quantity for which the marginal social benefit (MSB) from consuming the good equals the marginal social cost (MSC) of producing it. If there are no externalities, marginal social benefit equals the marginal private benefit, which is represented by consumers' reservation prices and the demand curve. Further, marginal social cost equals the marginal private cost, which is represented by the supply curve. Th~~, the social su.rpl~s l1l\v. maximizing condition MSB = MSC becomes equiyalent to the condition D = S, which ISJ (.\''f\J automaticalJy satisfied by a competitive market equilibrium. T~M. Ifthere are externalities, however, the competitive market equilibrium level ofoutput is nQ1 the social surplus maximizing level of output. Thus the competitive market equilibrium represents a deadweight loss. Here is the situation in our calamari example: P D -MPB-MSB "------'-_......:..._---~Q QEFF Q HKT . NEGATIVE PRODUCTION EXTERNALITY With a negative externality the market produces more calamari than the social surplus maximizing amount. Why? When the last units ofQ were produced, the market thought that their benefits (what people were willing to pay, the demand curve) slightly outweighed the costs of production (the supply curve), so the market said "go ahead and produce." In fact the costs to society (the cost of production plus the externality) were greater than the benefits,so w~ want the markc;t to say "don't produce anymore." We can use the above diagram to find the total additional cost associated with the externality at QMKT and QEFF. The additional cost is the difference between the MSC curve and the supply curve for all units produced. Thus, at QMKT the cost ofthe externality is B + C + D; at QEFF the cost ofihe externality is B. Notice that the cost ofthe externality does not go away at the efficient quantity, but it is lessened. Now that we can find the cost ofthe externality, we can use a welfare table to find the deadweight loss that occurs when Qt.~T is produced. The welfare table for externalities is different from the previous welfare tables you have used in two ways: +Go,/-t. ~~. 1. Instead offinding consumer surplus and producer surplus~eparately, we will lump them together. This means that we will not have to worry about what the price is at the market quantity and the efficient quantity; we can simply look for the area between the demand curve and the supply curve. When the demand curve is above theAupply curve (the usual case), this area represents positive consumer and producer surplu\f\lWhen the supply curve is above the demand curve (we will see this when we do positive externalities), this area represents neBative consumer and producer surplus.+ 6~ 2. The cost ofthe externalities is included in social surplus. The basic formula we will use is social surplus = (consumer surplus + producer surplus) + q~ - additional costs of negative externalities + additional benefits of positive externalities. To find the deadweight loss associated with an externality, we calculate total social surplus at the efficient level ofoutput, then calculate total social surplus at market level ofoutput, and then use these quantities to find the chanBe in total social surplus that occurs when the market level ~i output is produced instead ofthe efficient level ofoutput. ~. .J.- t1 VI 6~ ~ ~ ett k~~ ([ ~~1 b1~ +G\~ ~ S~~.:::J 'S ~Ql lA.~ • At QEFF At QMKT Difference l'~ ~ Consumer Surplus + A+B A+B+C C Producer Surplus + ~ft ~~ - Total Cost of B B+C+D C+D Negative Externality ~~. Social Surplus A A-D -D As the table shows, the deadweight loss that occurs when QMKT is produced is D. ~ {'10-\-t: GR- - 6.~"Jl+. Rw. PoSlt!yero.. P d uctlQnxterna'E I" Itles -­ Suppose that in our calamari example people ~ the smell ofgarlic and fish. Then the Daily Catch would be generating a positive externality and the marginal social cost ofproducing calamari would be ~ than the marginal private cost. In other words, the social cost equals the private cost of production m.imI.s the benefits to people walking down the street. In this case the market will produce less calamari than the amount which would maximize social surplus. p - MSB QMKT POSITIVE PRODUCTION EXTERNALITY We can find the area that represents the total additional benefit associated with the positive production externality. The total additional benefit is the area between the supply curve and the MSC curve for all units produced. At QEFF the additional social benefit associated with the externality is B + C + D; at Q~{},.'T the additional social benefit is B. Once again we can use a welfare table to find the deadweight loss that occurs when QMKT is produced. At QEFF At QMKT Difference Consumer Surplus + A-D A D Producer Surplus +6« + Total Benefit of B+C+D B -C-D Positive Externality Social Surplus A+B+C A+B -C The deadweight ]oss associated with Qfo.fKT is C. J;xternaUtjes ofConsumption So far we have discussed positive and negative externalities generated by the production of goods. There are also externalities generated by the consumption of goods. Alcohol and garlic bread have negative externalities associated with their consumption, while education and soap have positive externaliti"es associated with their consumption. For ne~atiye consumption externalities, we have the following situation: p MARGINAL COST OF EXTE~ITY S =MPC=MSC w:::;.. ....:-_-....:. ~~o OE:ff OMK! NEGATIVE CONSUMPTION EXTERNALITY For negative consumption externalities, the additional cost associated with the externality is the area between the demand curve and the MSB curve for all units produced. At QEfF At Q~{KT Difference 1~J ~onsumer Surplus + A+B A+B+C C Producer Surplus Total Cost of A A+C+D C+D -to Negative Externality Kef\~ Social Surplus B B-D -D The deadweight loss that occurs when Q~{KT is produced is area D. Qeff For positive consumption externalities, we have the following situation: EFF Q MKT Q Q POSITIVE CONSUMPTION EXTERNALITY For positive consumption externalities, the additional benefit associated with the externality is the area between the MSB curve and the demand curve for all units produced. At QEFF At Q~{KT Difference Consumer Surplus + B-D B D Producer Surplus + Total Benefit of A+C+D A -C-D Positive Externality Social Surplus A+B+C A+B -C In this case ofa positive consumption externality, the deadweight loss associated with producing QMKT is equal to C. Some final thoughts: *In cases ofnegative externalities, the government has a positive economic role to tax to reduce the quantity transacted. As we saw in lecture, they may either tax the good (electricity or gasoline) or they may use a Pigovian tax or permit scheme to tax the negative externality itself (pollution). *In cases ofpositive externalities, the government has a positive economic role to subsidize to increase the quantity transacted. *Try to convince yourselves that total social surplus is the area bounded by MSB and MSC up to Q efficient/optimal.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Social Costs of Regulation and Lack of Competition in Sweden: a Summary
    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: The Welfare State in Transition: Reforming the Swedish Model Volume Author/Editor: Richard B. Freeman, Robert Topel, and Birgitta Swedenborg, editors Volume Publisher: University of Chicago Press Volume ISBN: 0-226-26178-6 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/free97-1 Publication Date: January 1997 Chapter Title: The Social Costs of Regulation and Lack of Competition in Sweden: A Summary Chapter Author: Stefan Folster, Sam Peltzman Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c6526 Chapter pages in book: (p. 315 - 352) 8 The Social Costs of Regulation and Lack of Competition in Sweden: A Summary Stefan Folster and Sam Peltzman 8.1 Introduction Sweden is a “high-price’’ country. This seems evident to the casual visitor, and it is confirmed by more systematic evidence. For example, table 8.1 shows that, even after the 20 percent depreciation of the krona in 1992, Swedish con- sumer prices remain higher than in most developed countries. Moreover, avail- able data indicate that Sweden’s high-price status goes back at least to the late 1960s (Lipsey and Swedenborg 1993), a period encompassing considerable exchange rate fluctuations. These high prices cannot be entirely explained by Sweden’s income level (see fig. 8.1) or by its high indirect taxes (Lipsey and Swedenborg 1993). In this paper, we will try to assess the contribution of Swedish competition and regulatory policy to these high prices. To an outsider, especially an American conditioned by that country’s anti- trust laws, Swedish policy on competition has been remarkably lax.
    [Show full text]
  • Managerial Economics Unit 6: Oligopoly
    Managerial Economics Unit 6: Oligopoly Rudolf Winter-Ebmer Johannes Kepler University Linz Summer Term 2019 Managerial Economics: Unit 6 - Oligopoly1 / 45 OBJECTIVES Explain how managers of firms that operate in an oligopoly market can use strategic decision-making to maintain relatively high profits Understand how the reactions of market rivals influence the effectiveness of decisions in an oligopoly market Managerial Economics: Unit 6 - Oligopoly2 / 45 Oligopoly A market with a small number of firms (usually big) Oligopolists \know" each other Characterized by interdependence and the need for managers to explicitly consider the reactions of rivals Protected by barriers to entry that result from government, economies of scale, or control of strategically important resources Managerial Economics: Unit 6 - Oligopoly3 / 45 Strategic interaction Actions of one firm will trigger re-actions of others Oligopolist must take these possible re-actions into account before deciding on an action Therefore, no single, unified model of oligopoly exists I Cartel I Price leadership I Bertrand competition I Cournot competition Managerial Economics: Unit 6 - Oligopoly4 / 45 COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR: Cartel Cartel: A collusive arrangement made openly and formally I Cartels, and collusion in general, are illegal in the US and EU. I Cartels maximize profit by restricting the output of member firms to a level that the marginal cost of production of every firm in the cartel is equal to the market's marginal revenue and then charging the market-clearing price. F Behave like a monopoly I The need to allocate output among member firms results in an incentive for the firms to cheat by overproducing and thereby increase profit.
    [Show full text]
  • THE DEADWEIGHT LOSS from Alan J. Auerbach Working Paper No. 2510
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES THE DEADWEIGHT LOSS FROM "NONNEUTRAL" CAPITAL INCOME TAXATION Alan J. Auerbach Working Paper No. 2510 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 February 1988 I am grateful to the National Science Foundation for financial support (grant #SES— 8617495), to Kevin Hassett for excellent research assistance, and to Jim Hines, Larry Kotlikoff and participants in seminars at Columbia, NBER, Penn and Western Ontario for connnents on earlier drafts. The research reported here is part of the NBERs research program in Taxation. Any opinions expressed are those of the author and not those of the National Bureau of Economic Research, Support from The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. NBER Working Paper #2510 The Deadweight Loss froni "Nonneutral" Capital Income Taxation ABSTRACT This paper develops an overlapping generations general equilibrium growth model with an explicit characterization of the role of capital goods in the evaluate and production process. The model is rich enough in structure to measure simultaneously the different distortions associated with capital income taxation (across sectors, across assets and across time) yet simple enough to yield intuitive analytical results as well. The main result is that uniform capital income taxation is almost certainly suboptimal, theoretically, but that empirically, optimal deviations from uniform taxation are inconsequential. We also find that though the gains from a move to uniform taxation are not large in absolute magnitude these of gains would be offset only by an overall rise in capital income tax rates several percentage points. A separate contribution of the paper is the development of a technique for distinguishing intergenerational transfers from efficiency gains in analyzing the effects of policy changes on long—run welfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Total Cost and Profit
    4/22/2016 Total Cost and Profit Gina Rablau Gina Rablau - Total Cost and Profit A Mini Project for Module 1 Project Description This project demonstrates the following concepts in integral calculus: Indefinite integrals. Project Description Use integration to find total cost functions from information involving marginal cost (that is, the rate of change of cost) for a commodity. Use integration to derive profit functions from the marginal revenue functions. Optimize profit, given information regarding marginal cost and marginal revenue functions. The marginal cost for a commodity is MC = C′(x), where C(x) is the total cost function. Thus if we have the marginal cost function, we can integrate to find the total cost. That is, C(x) = Ȅ ͇̽ ͬ͘ . The marginal revenue for a commodity is MR = R′(x), where R(x) is the total revenue function. If, for example, the marginal cost is MC = 1.01(x + 190) 0.01 and MR = ( /1 2x +1)+ 2 , where x is the number of thousands of units and both revenue and cost are in thousands of dollars. Suppose further that fixed costs are $100,236 and that production is limited to at most 180 thousand units. C(x) = ∫ MC dx = ∫1.01(x + 190) 0.01 dx = (x + 190 ) 01.1 + K 1 Gina Rablau Now, we know that the total revenue is 0 if no items are produced, but the total cost may not be 0 if nothing is produced. The fixed costs accrue whether goods are produced or not. Thus the value for the constant of integration depends on the fixed costs FC of production.
    [Show full text]
  • Marginal Social Cost Pricing on a Transportation Network
    December 2007 RFF DP 07-52 Marginal Social Cost Pricing on a Transportation Network A Comparison of Second-Best Policies Elena Safirova, Sébastien Houde, and Winston Harrington 1616 P St. NW Washington, DC 20036 202-328-5000 www.rff.org DISCUSSION PAPER Marginal Social Cost Pricing on a Transportation Network: A Comparison of Second-Best Policies Elena Safirova, Sébastien Houde, and Winston Harrington Abstract In this paper we evaluate and compare long-run economic effects of six road-pricing schemes aimed at internalizing social costs of transportation. In order to conduct this analysis, we employ a spatially disaggregated general equilibrium model of a regional economy that incorporates decisions of residents, firms, and developers, integrated with a spatially-disaggregated strategic transportation planning model that features mode, time period, and route choice. The model is calibrated to the greater Washington, DC metropolitan area. We compare two social cost functions: one restricted to congestion alone and another that accounts for other external effects of transportation. We find that when the ultimate policy goal is a reduction in the complete set of motor vehicle externalities, cordon-like policies and variable-toll policies lose some attractiveness compared to policies based primarily on mileage. We also find that full social cost pricing requires very high toll levels and therefore is bound to be controversial. Key Words: traffic congestion, social cost pricing, land use, welfare analysis, road pricing, general equilibrium, simulation, Washington DC JEL Classification Numbers: Q53, Q54, R13, R41, R48 © 2007 Resources for the Future. All rights reserved. No portion of this paper may be reproduced without permission of the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • Externalities and Public Goods Introduction 17
    17 Externalities and Public Goods Introduction 17 Chapter Outline 17.1 Externalities 17.2 Correcting Externalities 17.3 The Coase Theorem: Free Markets Addressing Externalities on Their Own 17.4 Public Goods 17.5 Conclusion Introduction 17 Pollution is a major fact of life around the world. • The United States has areas (notably urban) struggling with air quality; the health costs are estimated at more than $100 billion per year. • Much pollution is due to coal-fired power plants operating both domestically and abroad. Other forms of pollution are also common. • The noise of your neighbor’s party • The person smoking next to you • The mess in someone’s lawn Introduction 17 These outcomes are evidence of a market failure. • Markets are efficient when all transactions that positively benefit society take place. • An efficient market takes all costs and benefits, both private and social, into account. • Similarly, the smoker in the park is concerned only with his enjoyment, not the costs imposed on other people in the park. • An efficient market takes these additional costs into account. Asymmetric information is a source of market failure that we considered in the last chapter. Here, we discuss two further sources. 1. Externalities 2. Public goods Externalities 17.1 Externalities: A cost or benefit that affects a party not directly involved in a transaction. • Negative externality: A cost imposed on a party not directly involved in a transaction ‒ Example: Air pollution from coal-fired power plants • Positive externality: A benefit conferred on a party not directly involved in a transaction ‒ Example: A beekeeper’s bees not only produce honey but can help neighboring farmers by pollinating crops.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Evaluation Glossary of Terms
    Economic Evaluation Glossary of Terms A Attributable fraction: indirect health expenditures associated with a given diagnosis through other diseases or conditions (Prevented fraction: indicates the proportion of an outcome averted by the presence of an exposure that decreases the likelihood of the outcome; indicates the number or proportion of an outcome prevented by the “exposure”) Average cost: total resource cost, including all support and overhead costs, divided by the total units of output B Benefit-cost analysis (BCA): (or cost-benefit analysis) a type of economic analysis in which all costs and benefits are converted into monetary (dollar) values and results are expressed as either the net present value or the dollars of benefits per dollars expended Benefit-cost ratio: a mathematical comparison of the benefits divided by the costs of a project or intervention. When the benefit-cost ratio is greater than 1, benefits exceed costs C Comorbidity: presence of one or more serious conditions in addition to the primary disease or disorder Cost analysis: the process of estimating the cost of prevention activities; also called cost identification, programmatic cost analysis, cost outcome analysis, cost minimization analysis, or cost consequence analysis Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA): an economic analysis in which all costs are related to a single, common effect. Results are usually stated as additional cost expended per additional health outcome achieved. Results can be categorized as average cost-effectiveness, marginal cost-effectiveness,
    [Show full text]
  • Neoliberalism Vs Islam, an Analysis of Social Cost in Case of USA and Saudi Arabia
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive Neoliberalism vs Islam, An analysis of Social Cost in case of USA and Saudi Arabia Hayat, Azmat and Muhammad Shafiai, Muhammad Hakimi and Haron, Sabri University of Malakand Pakistan 3 February 2021 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/105746/ MPRA Paper No. 105746, posted 04 Feb 2021 13:10 UTC Neoliberalism vs Islam, An analysis of Social Cost in case of USA and Saudi Arabia AZMAT HAYAT1 MUHAMMAD HAKIMI MUHAMMAD SHAFIAI MUHAMAD SABRI HARON Abstract Neoliberal principles are positively thought by hegemonic western countries as something beneficial to humanity and societies across the planet. This claim is in sharp contrast to the followers of Islam, who believes that more than 1400 years ago Islam already provided the best and everlasting ideology for the welfare of humanity. This study thoroughly investigated the claims of these contrasting ideologies. The hypothesis at the core of this endeavour is that neoliberal ideology is linearly associated with social costs, which can also be explained quantitatively as something associated with reduced standard of living. In order to investigate this hypothesis, USA and Saudi Arabia are selected as a sample. Besides analysing the previous literature, descriptive statistics from the most recent 2020 world Development Indicators are used for testing this hypothesis. Results indicates show that crime rate in the USA is higher than Saudi Arabia. 1 Introduction: In ancient times, crucial issues, such as the nature of Good and the connotation of Justice were determined in Socratic dialogue (Fukuyama 1992, p 61), on the logic of contradiction, i.e., the less irrational side was termed as victorious.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Microeconomics
    PRINCIPLES OF MICROECONOMICS A. Competition The basic motivation to produce in a market economy is the expectation of income, which will generate profits. • The returns to the efforts of a business - the difference between its total revenues and its total costs - are profits. Thus, questions of revenues and costs are key in an analysis of the profit motive. • Other motivations include nonprofit incentives such as social status, the need to feel important, the desire for recognition, and the retaining of one's job. Economists' calculations of profits are different from those used by businesses in their accounting systems. Economic profit = total revenue - total economic cost • Total economic cost includes the value of all inputs used in production. • Normal profit is an economic cost since it occurs when economic profit is zero. It represents the opportunity cost of labor and capital contributed to the production process by the producer. • Accounting profits are computed only on the basis of explicit costs, including labor and capital. Since they do not take "normal profits" into consideration, they overstate true profits. Economic profits reward entrepreneurship. They are a payment to discovering new and better methods of production, taking above-average risks, and producing something that society desires. The ability of each firm to generate profits is limited by the structure of the industry in which the firm is engaged. The firms in a competitive market are price takers. • None has any market power - the ability to control the market price of the product it sells. • A firm's individual supply curve is a very small - and inconsequential - part of market supply.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Costs of Greenhouse Gases
    NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW Social Costs of Greenhouse Gases FEBRUARY 2017 Climate change imposes significant costs on society. cientific studies show that climate change will have, and in some cases has already had, severe consequences for society, like the spread of disease, increased food insecurity, and coastal destruction. These damages from emitting greenhouse gases are not reflected in the price of fossil fuels, creating what economists call S“externalities.” The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a metric designed to quantify climate damages, representing the net economic cost of carbon dioxide emissions. The SCC can be used to evaluate policies that affect greenhouse gas emissions. Simply, the SCC is a monetary estimate of the damage done by each ton of carbon dioxide1 that is released into the air. In order to maximize social welfare, policymakers must ensure that the market properly accounts for all externalities, like greenhouse gas pollution. By failing to account fully for carbon pollution, for example, policymakers would tip the scales in favor of dirtier energy sources, letting polluters pass the costs of their carbon emissions onto the public. Incorporating the SCC into policy analysis removes that bias by accounting for the costs of such pollution. The Social Cost of Carbon is a critical tool, offering information to help assess policies. The SCC allows federal agencies to weigh the benefits of mitigating climate change against the costs of limiting carbon pollution when they conduct regulatory analyses of federal actions that affect carbon emissions. To date, the SCC has been used to evaluate approximately 100 federal actions.
    [Show full text]
  • PRINCIPLES of MICROECONOMICS 2E
    PRINCIPLES OF MICROECONOMICS 2e Chapter 8 Perfect Competition PowerPoint Image Slideshow Competition in Farming Depending upon the competition and prices offered, a wheat farmer may choose to grow a different crop. (Credit: modification of work by Daniel X. O'Neil/Flickr Creative Commons) 8.1 Perfect Competition and Why It Matters ● Market structure - the conditions in an industry, such as number of sellers, how easy or difficult it is for a new firm to enter, and the type of products that are sold. ● Perfect competition - each firm faces many competitors that sell identical products. • 4 criteria: • many firms produce identical products, • many buyers and many sellers are available, • sellers and buyers have all relevant information to make rational decisions, • firms can enter and leave the market without any restrictions. ● Price taker - a firm in a perfectly competitive market that must take the prevailing market price as given. 8.2 How Perfectly Competitive Firms Make Output Decisions ● A perfectly competitive firm has only one major decision to make - what quantity to produce? ● A perfectly competitive firm must accept the price for its output as determined by the product’s market demand and supply. ● The maximum profit will occur at the quantity where the difference between total revenue and total cost is largest. Total Cost and Total Revenue at a Raspberry Farm ● Total revenue for a perfectly competitive firm is a straight line sloping up; the slope is equal to the price of the good. ● Total cost also slopes up, but with some curvature. ● At higher levels of output, total cost begins to slope upward more steeply because of diminishing marginal returns.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comment on Ahdieh, Beyond Individualism in Law and Economics
    A COMMENT ON AHDIEH, BEYOND INDIVIDUALISM IN LAW AND ECONOMICS ∗ THOMAS S. ULEN Robert Ahdieh has been a marvelously productive legal scholar, producing a string of first-rate articles1 and an insightful book on recent Russian law.2 His most recent piece – Beyond Individualism in Law and Economics3 – is, like its predecessors, lucidly written and forcefully argued. Here the contention is that the field of economics has a commitment to a methodology of investigation that makes economic analysis inappropriate for illuminating some core legal concerns. Because I have such a high regard for Professor Ahdieh’s previous work, it pains me to say that I disagree with much of what he has written in his article. The criticisms that he levels at law and economics and at the field of econom- ics are, I believe, misplaced and out of date. His analyses revive a long- standing and still widely held criticism among law professors of economics and law and economics. Unfortunately, these criticisms either have been ad- dressed or are off-kilter. In essence, Professor Ahdieh’s criticisms attack an enemy who has long since been vanquished from the field of battle. Econom- ics, in its own area of inquiry, and law and economics in its area have both moved far, far beyond whatever constraining effect methodological individual- ism had in the 1970s and 1980s. Indeed, I would go much farther: I think that we are living in a golden age of scholarly inquiry into human behavior, and that golden age is illustrated, at least in part, by the remarkable range of scho- larship that is being done by legal scholars, many of whom are using such up- to-the-minute tools of law and economics as behavioral science, psychology, ∗ Visiting Professor, University of Maryland School of Law; Swanlund Chair Emeritus, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Professor Emeritus of Law, University of Illinois College of Law.
    [Show full text]