Notes on market failure and the Paretian (Kaldor-Hicks) relevance and irrelevance of unfavourable externalities

The following are notes that have been distributed by me over the last few years to students in Environmental Economics at The University of Queensland. They give particular attention to whether externalities are Pareto or Kaldor-Hicks relevant from a policy point of view. Externalities are Kaldor-Hicks or Pareto irrelevant if no change is possible for which gainers could compensate losers. Both absolute and marginal externalities may be Kaldor-Hicks relevant. Infra-marginal negative externalities are often, but not always, Kaldor-Hicks irrelevant. There are at least two cases where such externalities can be relevant. First, the absolute impact of the negative externality may be so great that the source of the externality should be eliminated. Secondly, if the externality arises from production, its nature may depend on the type of production technique adopted. Although for the technique adopted, an infra-marginal negative externality occurs. That is Paretian irrelevant given that choice of this technique is the only available possibility, alternative techniques may actually be available in practice. Some of these may generate even smaller total external effects and be socially preferable. Both cases are outlined and illustrated in these notes. The analysis reveals the dangers of relying on marginalism for deciding on environmental policy. Total (external) effects are often of great social and economic importance and appropriate social choices cannot be made on the basis of marginalism alone.

Value and prices in Russian economic thought (1890-1920)

The subject "Value and prices in Russian economic thought (1890--1920)" should evoke several names and debates in the reader's mind. For a long time, Western scholars have been aware that the Russian economists Tugan-Baranovsky and Bortkiewicz were active participants to the Marxian transformation problem, that the mathematical models of Dmitriev prefigured forthcoming neoricardian based models, and that many Russian economists were either supporting the Marxian labour theory of value or being revisionists. Moreover, these ideas were preparing the ground for Soviet planning. Russian scholars additionally knew that this period was the time of introduction of marginalism in Russia, and that, during this period, economists were active in thinking the relation of ethics with economic theory. All these issues are well covered in the existing literature. But there is a big gap that this dissertation intends to fill. The existing literature handles these pieces separately, although they are part of a single, more general, history. All these issues (the labour theory of value, marginalism, the Marxian transformation problem, planning, ethics, mathematical economics) were part of what this dissertation calls here "The Russian synthesis". The Russian synthesis (in the singular) designates here all the attempts at synthesis between classical political economy and marginalism, between labour theory of value and marginal utility, and between value and prices that occurred in Russian economic thought between 1890 and 1920, and that embraces the whole set of issues evoked above. This dissertation has the ambition of being the first comprehensive history of that Russian synthesis. In this, this contribution is unique. It has always surprised the author of the present dissertation that such a book has not yet been written. Several good reasons, both in terms of scarce availability of sources and of ideological restrictions, may accounted for a reasonable delay of several decades. But it is now urgent to remedy the situation before the protagonists of the Russian synthesis are definitely classified under the wrong labels in the pantheon of economic thought. To accomplish this task, it has seldom be sufficient to gather together the various existing studies on aspects of this story. It as been necessary to return to the primary sources in the Russian language. The most important part of the primary literature has never been translated, and in the last years only some of them have been republished in Russian. Therefore, most translations from the Russian have been made by the author of the present dissertation. The secondary literature has been surveyed in the languages that are familiar (Russian, English and French) or almost familiar (German) to the present author, and which are hopefully the most pertinent to the present investigation. Besides, and in order to increase the acquaintance with the text, which was the objective of all this, some archival sources were used. The analysis consists of careful chronological studies of the authors' writings and their evolution in their historical and intellectual context. As a consequence, the dissertation brings new authors to the foreground - Shaposhnikov and Yurovsky - who were traditionally confined to the substitutes' bench, because they only superficially touched the domains quoted above. In the Russian synthesis however, they played an important part of the story. As a side effect, some authors that used to play in the foreground - Dmitriev and Bortkiewicz - are relegated to the background, but are not forgotten. Besides, the dissertation refreshes the views on authors already known, such as Ziber and, especially, Tugan-Baranovsky. The ultimate objective of this dissertation is to change the opinion that one could have on "value and prices in Russian economic thought", by setting the Russian synthesis at the centre of the debates.

Value and Prices in Russian Economic Thought: A journey inside the Russian Synthesis, 1890-1920

This book explores Russian synthesis that occurred in Russian economic thought between 1890 and 1920. This includes all the attempts at synthesis between classical political economy and marginalism; the labour theory of value and marginal utility; and value and prices. The various ways in which Russian economists have approached these issues have generally been addressed in a piecemeal fashion in history of economic thought literature. This book returns to the primary sources in the Russian language, translating many into English for the first time, and offers the first comprehensive history of the Russian synthesis. The book first examines the origins of the Russian synthesis by determining the condition of reception in Russia of the various theories of value involved: the classical theories of value of Ricardo and Marx on one side; the marginalist theories of prices of Menger, Walras and Jevons on the other. It then reconstructs the three generations of the Russian synthesis: the first (Tugan-Baranovsky), the second, the mathematicians (Dmitriev, Bortkiewicz, Shaposhnikov, Slutsky, etc.) and the last (Yurovsky), with an emphasis on Tugan-Baranovsky's initial impetus. This volume is suitable for those studying economic theory and philosophy as well as those interested in the history of economic thought.

Economía matemática: antecedentes, evolución y algunos desarrollos recientes

Se presenta aquí, en forma breve, el origen de la matematización económica y el campo de la economía matemática. Un enfoque histórico inicial divide dicho campo en un primer periodo denominado marginalista, otro donde se utiliza la teoría de los conjuntos y modelos lineales y por último un periodo que integra los dos anteriores. Posteriormente, se analiza la evolución de la Teoría del Equilibrio General desde Quesnay, pasando por Walras y desarrollos posteriores hasta su culminación con los trabajos de Arrow, Debreu y sus contemporáneos. Finalmente, se describe la influencia de las matemáticas, en especial de la optimización dinámica, en la teoría macroeconómica y a otras áreas de la economía.

A economia como ciência. Dos clássicos a Keynes

Este ensaio se propõe confrontar a abordagem neoclássica da economia como ciência positiva, com a modelo keynesiano e a visão da economia dinâmica de Kalecki, onde a economia é tratada desde a perspectiva de uma ciência moral e normativa. Para tanto analisaremos as bases teóricas de cada modelo, seus pressupostos, leis fundamentais e principais conclusões. Dado o propósito didático do texto nos preocupamos em tentar explicar os antecedentes, axiomas, leis e relações funcionais de cada modelo, dando especial ênfase às que surgem da crítica de postulados anteriores, pois admitimos que cada modelo incorpora valores, pressupostos e metodologia própria, cuja crítica é essencial para o avanço da ciência. A economia neoclássica supõe agentes racionais, informação completa e ações e resultados imediatos. Seu método de análise é a otimização com restrições. O principio ordenador, necessário e suficiente da atividade econômica, consiste no comportamento racional dos agentes. Este modelo tem sua concepção política e ética das relações econômicas, consistente com seus pressupostos, o que fica patente, por exemplo, a propósito de sua teoria da distribuição da renda. Com a introdução de conceitos como: o tempo histórico; o caracter monetário da produção; a preferência pela liquidez; o comportamento subjetivo dos agentes; o predomínio da procura sobre a oferta; as expectativas e a incerteza em relação ao futuro, etc., a macroeconomia de Keynes consegue romper o paradigma anterior, do ajuste automático dos mercados de acordo com um feedeback contínuo e estável, capaz de garantir o equilíbrio de pleno emprego. Embora a análise keynesiana tivesse permitido a abordagem precisa de questões tão importantes como: a natureza e as causas do desemprego; o papel da moeda e do crédito; a determinação dos juros; os condicionantes do investimento, etc., faltava ainda uma teoria dos preços, da distribuição e do ciclo econômico, no que o trabalho de M. Kalecki, certamente parece ter avançado. Este autor parte de um contexto cultural e ideológico que lhe permite abordar sem entraves a natureza do capitalismo. Seu enfoque micro e macroeconômico é integrado e está apoiado no pressuposto da concorrência imperfeita. No universo keynesiano os mercados podem estar em equilíbrio, mas não no de pleno emprego, já segundo Kalecki o ciclo econômico é inevitável. Em ambos os casos os mercados não são perfeitos e não tendem naturalmente para o equilíbrio, o que justifica a ação reguladora do Estado, de acordo sua opção política e um código de valores preestabelecido. É de se imaginar que cada modelo de análise esteja condicionado pelo conjunto de valores dominantes do momento, o que não invalida o caracter de ciência social da economia. Por exemplo, desde a perspectiva individualista da troca mercantil, a economia se apresenta com a metodologia de ciência pura, porém, levando em conta as relações de classe social, é uma ciência moral.