Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Causes of Market Failure (Monopoly power (Monopoly Power can come from…
Causes of Market Failure
Information Failure
Producers must provide perfect information so that there is no information failure and the consumer can accurately judge the net benefit that they would receive from the product
The information problem occurs when people make wrong decisions because they don't possess or ignore the relevant information
Some economists argue that the under-consumption of merit goods and over consumption of de merit goods stem from the information problem
For example take the demerit tobacco, many young people become addicted to tobacco in teenage years through peer pressure and personal circumstance. Individuals take into account the short term costs and benefits but may undervalue or ignore the long term private costs/ benefits due to a lack of information.
On the other hand, merit goods such as preventative dentistry. The long term private benefits of using this service outweigh the cost of regular check ups. However, many ignore this and decide not to consume the service due to the short term costs this introduces (time, money charged by dentist, unpleasant experience). In the long run the cost is rotten teeth or gum disease which is worse than going to the dentist more 'when I was younger'
-
Externalities are a type of public good that are ‘dumped’ by those who produced it onto third parties who receive/ consume it without the choice to reject it. Externalities are produced and received outside the market as they are not bought or sold. They lead to partial economic failure
-
-
Public Goods (non-excludable, non diminishable) can result in complete market failure and 'missing markets'
Complete market failure is when a ‘missing market’ fails to exist and the economy completely fails to produce a good or service
The market failure among pure public goods and open access to resources can be demonstrated using 'Tragedy of the commons'
-
An open access field of cows has a carrying capacity of 8. If more than 9 cows are added the grass cannot regrow which actually lowers the carrying capacity to say 6, and the cows are less healthy producing products of a lower quality reducing profits. Therefore, it is in the farmer’s best interests to keep the number of cows at carrying capacity.
Each individual farmer gets the direct income from each animal, but all farmers share the cost of the degraded grass. If a farmer adds another cow it will reduce the health of all cows in the field although that farmer will come out ahead as he has more direct sources of profit. Every farmer acts under these incentives and will keep adding animals.
If one farmer decided to boycott the field for its conservation another farmer would just come in. The field will not be around for ever, so they see no point in protecting it and just try to use it before everyone else.
The tragedy of the commons assumes no communication. The management of global greenhouse emissions faces the same problems due to large area of land that is involved and cultural/ language barriers.
-
If the field was privately owned the farmer chose to add another animal, they would only be hurting themselves and so this is an argument for privatisation.
-
-