914 resultados para Public Good Provision
Resumo:
In this analysis, we examine the relationship between an individual's decision to volunteer and the average level of volunteering in the community where the individual resides. Our theoretical model is based on a coordination game , in which volunteering by others is informative regarding the benefit from volunteering. We demonstrate that the interaction between this information and one's private information makes it more likely that he or she will volunteer, given a higher level of contributions by his or her peers. We complement this theoretical work with an empirical analysis using Census 2000 Summary File 3 and Current Population Survey (CPS) 2004-2007 September supplement file data. We control for various individual and community characteristics, and employ robustness checks to verify the results of the baseline analysis. We additionally use an innovative instrumental variables strategy to account for reflection bias and endogeneity caused by selective sorting by individuals into neighborhoods, which allows us to argue for a causal interpretation. The empirical results in the baseline, as well as all robustness analyses, verify the main result of our theoretical model, and we employ a more general structure to further strengthen our results.
Resumo:
In this analysis, we examine the relationship between an individual’s decision to volunteer and the average level of volunteering in the community where the individual resides. Our theoretical model is based on a coordination game , in which volunteering by others is informative regarding the benefit from volunteering. We demonstrate that the interaction between this information and one’s private information makes it more likely that he or she will volunteer, given a higher level of contributions by his or her peers. We complement this theoretical work with an empirical analysis using Census 2000 Summary File 3 and Current Population Survey (CPS) 2004-2007 September supplement file data. We control for various individual and community characteristics, and employ robustness checks to verify the results of the baseline analysis. We additionally use an innovative instrumental variables strategy to account for reflection bias and endogeneity caused by selective sorting by individuals into neighbourhoods, which allows us to argue for a causal interpretation. The empirical results in the baseline, as well as all robustness analyses, verify the main result of our theoretical model, and we employ a more general structure to further strengthen our results.
Resumo:
People contribute more to experimental public goods the more others contribute, a tendency called “crowding-in.” We propose a novel experimental design to distinguish two possible causes of crowding-in: reciprocity, the usual explanation, and conformity, a neglected alternative. Subjects are given the opportunity to react to contributions of a payoff-irrelevant group, in addition to their own group. We find evidence of conformity, accounting for roughly 1/3 of crowding-in.
Resumo:
This article studies a model where, as a consequence of private information, agents do not have incentive to invest in a desired joint project, or a public good, when they are unable to have prior discussion with their partners. As a result, the joint project is never undertaken and inefficiency is observed. Agastya, Menezes and Sengupta (2007) prove that with a prior stage of communication, with a binary message space, it is possible to have some efficiency gain since "all ex-ante and interim efficient equilibria exhibit a simple structure". We show that any finite message space does not provide efficiency gain on the simple structure discussed in that article. We use laboratory experiments to test these results. We find that people do contribute, even without communication, and that any kind of communication increases the probability of project implementation. We also observed that communication reduces the unproductive contribution, and that a large message space cannot provide efficiency gain relative to the binary one.
Resumo:
This paper investigates the causes of municipalities secession in Brazil. The theoretical model proposes that the median voter is not fully informed about the efficiency effect of secession on public good provision and uses the break up decision undertaken by neighbor’s municipalities within the state to account for his voting. Our empirical results confirms that prediction
Resumo:
This paper compares how increases in experience versus increases in knowledge about a public good affect willingness to pay (WTP) for its provision. This is challenging because while consumers are often certain about their previous experiences with a good, they may be uncertain about the accuracy of their knowledge. We therefore design and conduct a field experiment in which treated subjects receive a precise and objective signal regarding their knowledge about a public good before estimating their WTP for it. Using data for two different public goods, we show qualitative equivalence of the effect of knowledge and experience on valuation for a public good. Surprisingly, though, we find that the causal effect of objective signals about the accuracy of a subject’s knowledge for a public good can dramatically affect their valuation for it: treatment causes an increase of $150-$200 in WTP for well-informed individuals. We find no such effect for less informed subjects. Our results imply that WTP estimates for public goods are not only a function of true information states of the respondents but beliefs about those information states.
Resumo:
We study the problem of provision and cost-sharing of a public good in large economies where exclusion, complete or partial, is possible. We search for incentive-constrained efficient allocation rules that display fairness properties. Population monotonicity says that an increase in population should not be detrimental to anyone. Demand monotonicity states that an increase in the demand for the public good (in the sense of a first-order stochastic dominance shift in the distribution of preferences) should not be detrimental to any agent whose preferences remain unchanged. Under suitable domain restrictions, there exists a unique incentive-constrained efficient and demand-monotonic allocation rule: the so-called serial rule. In the binary public good case, the serial rule is also the only incentive-constrained efficient and population-monotonic rule.
Resumo:
This paper discusses the problem of optimal design of a jurisdiction structure from the view point of a utilitarian social planner when individuals with identical utility functions for a non-rival public good and private consumption have private information about their contributive capacities. It shows that the superiority of a centralized provision of a non-rival public good over a federal one does not always hold. Specifically, when differences in individuals’ contributive capacities are large, it is better to provide the public good in several distinct jurisdictions rather than to pool these jurisdictions into a single one. In the specific situation where individuals have logarithmic utilities, the paper provides a complete characterization of the optimal jurisdiction structure in the two-type case.
Resumo:
The purpose of the article is to present different conceptualizations of health as a public good. Author considers whether analytical tools and conceptual framework developed in the studies on the issue of public goods might be useful in order to analyze health. It was noted that health belongs to the special group of exceptional goods, since it carries the characteristics of both private and public good. It was emphasized that the distribution of public goods is a complex issue that requires an appropriate system of incentives as well as instruments in charge of its proper functioning. In the article it is argued that the widespread social anxiety and growing fear of further integration and globalization to a large extend results from the wrong management and unequal provision of global public goods.
Resumo:
This paper studies information transmission between multiple agents with di¤erent preferences and a welfare maximizing decision maker who chooses the quality or quantity of a public good (e.g. provision of public health service; carbon emissions policy; pace of lectures in a classroom) that is consumed by all of them. Communication in such circumstances suffers from the agents' incentive to "exaggerate" their preferences relative to the average of the other agents, since the decision maker's reaction to each agent's message is weaker than in one-to-one communication. As the number of agents becomes larger the quality of information transmission diminishes. The use of binary messages (e.g. "yes" or "no") is shown to be a robust mode of communication when the main source of informational distortion is exaggeration.
Resumo:
In this study we elicit agents’ prior information set regarding a public good, exogenously give information treatments to survey respondents and subsequently elicit willingness to pay for the good and posterior information sets. The design of this field experiment allows us to perform theoretically motivated hypothesis testing between different updating rules: non-informative updating, Bayesian updating, and incomplete updating. We find causal evidence that agents imperfectly update their information sets. We also field causal evidence that the amount of additional information provided to subjects relative to their pre-existing information levels can affect stated WTP in ways consistent overload from too much learning. This result raises important (though familiar) issues for the use of stated preference methods in policy analysis.
Resumo:
This paper studies how privatising service provision (shifting control rights and contractualobligations to providers) affects accountability. There are two main effects. (1) Privatisation demotivates governments from investigating and responding to public demands, since providers then hold up service adaptations. (2) Privatisation demotivates the public from mobilising to pressure for service adaptations, since providers then indirectly holdup the public by inflating the government s cost of implementing these adaptations. So, when choosing governance mode, politicians may be biased towards privatising as a way to escape public attention; relatedly, privatising utilities may reduce public pressure and increase consumer prices.
Resumo:
When deciding to resort to a PPP contract for the provision of a local public service, local governments have to consider the demand risk allocation between the contracting parties. In this article, I investigate the effects of demand risk allocation on the accountability of procuring authorities regarding consumers changing demand, as well as on the cost-reducing effort incentives of the private public-service provider. I show that contracts in which the private provider bears demand risk motivate more the public authority from responding to customer needs. This is due to the fact that consumers are empowered when the private provider bears demand risk, that is, they have the possibility to oust the private provider in case of non-satisfaction with the service provision, which provides procuring authorities with more credibility in side-trading and then more incentives to be responsive. As a consequence, I show that there is a lower matching with consumers' preferences over time when demand risk is on the public authority rather than on the private provider, and this is corroborated in the light of two famous case studies. However, contracts in which the private provider does not bear demand risk motivate more the private provider from investing in cost-reducing efforts. I highlight then a tradeoff in the allocation of demand risk between productive and allocative efficiency. The striking policy implication of this article for local governments would be that the current trend towards a greater resort to contracts where private providers bear little or no demand risk may not be optimal. Local governments should impose demand risk on private providers within PPP contracts when they expect that consumers' preferences over the service provision will change over time.
Resumo:
Combining theories on social trust and social capital with sociopsychological approaches and applying contextual analyses to Swiss and European survey data, this thesis examines under what circumstances generalised trust, often understood as public good, may not benefit everyone, but instead amplify inequality. The empirical investigation focuses on the Swiss context, but considers different scales of analysis. Two broader questions are addressed. First, might generalised trust imply more or less narrow visions of community and solidarity in different contexts? Applying nonlinear principal component analysis to aggregate indicators, Study 1 explores inclusive and exclusive types of social capital in Europe, measured as regional configurations of generalised trust, civic participation and attitudes towards diversity. Study 2 employs multilevel models to examine how generalised trust, as an individual predisposition and an aggregate climate at the level of Swiss cantons, is linked to equality- directed collective action intention versus radical right support. Second, might high-trust climates impact negatively on disadvantaged members of society, precisely because they reflect a normative discourse of social harmony that impedes recognition of inequality? Study 3 compares how climates of generalised trust at the level of Swiss micro-regions and subjective perceptions of neighbourhood cohesion moderate the negative relationship between socio-economic disadvantage and mental health. Overall, demonstrating beneficial, as well as counterintuitive effects of social trust, this thesis proposes a critical and contextualised approach to the sources and dynamics of social cohesion in democratic societies. -- Cette thèse combine des théories sur le capital social et la confiance sociale avec des approches psychosociales et s'appuie sur des analyses contextuelles de données d'enquêtes suisses et européennes, afin d'étudier dans quelles circonstances la confiance généralisée, souvent présentée comme un bien public, pourrait ne pas bénéficier à tout le monde, mais amplifier les inégalités. Les études empiriques, centrées sur le contexte suisse, intègrent différentes échelles d'analyse et investiguent deux questions principales. Premièrement, la confiance généralisée implique-t-elle des visions plus ou moins restrictives de la communauté et de la solidarité selon le contexte? Dans l'étude 1, une analyse à composantes principales non-linéaire sur des indicateurs agrégés permet d'explorer des types de capital social inclusif et exclusif en Europe, mesurés par des configurations régionales de confiance généralisée, de participation civique, et d'attitudes envers la diversité. L'étude 2 utilise des modèles multiniveaux afin d'analyser comment la confiance généralisée, en tant que prédisposition individuelle et climat agrégé au niveau des cantons suisses, est associée à l'intention de participer à des actions collectives en faveur de l'égalité ou, au contraire, à l'intention de voter pour la droite radicale. Deuxièmement, des climats de haute confiance peuvent-ils avoir un impact négatif sur des membres désavantagés de la société, précisément parce qu'ils reflètent un discours normatif d'harmonie sociale qui empêche la reconnaissance des inégalités? L'étude 3 analyse comment des climats de confiance au niveau des micro-régions suisses et la perception subjective de faire partie d'un environnement cohésif modèrent la relation négative entre le désavantage socio-économique et la santé mentale. En démontrant des effets bénéfiques mais aussi contre-intuitifs de la confiance sociale, cette thèse propose une approche critique et contextualisée des sources et dynamiques de la cohésion sociale dans les sociétés démocratiques.