The end of the externality revolution: A. H. Barnett and Bruce yandle

Social Philosophy and Policy 26 (2):130-150 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In the early 1970s, we and others in the economics profession became enamored with the notion of externalties—a cost or benefit imposed on or provided to others but not taken into account by the economic agents who generate the effect. We, and others, seemed to see external effects everywhere. There was polluted water and air, noise, urban blight, traffic congestion, and other features of modern life that seemed to call out for some form of corrective action. As the externalities revolution unfolded, economists and other social scientists overlooked the importance of evolved legal and other institutions that formally and informally establish property and liability rules that cause decision makers to face the cost of their actions, including what otherwise could be external costs imposed on unwilling third parties. While markets seemed always to fail, political institutions were seen systematically as without blemish, or so it seemed. It was this two-pronged failure, 1) a failure to consider and state assumptions about background institutional arrangements and 2) a disregard for special interest politics, that became the Achilles Heel of the otherwise elegant externality arguments. Eventually, it was the modern institutionalists, scholars who focused on laws, regulation, and rules of the marketplace, who attempted to close the lid and drive the nails on the externality coffin. In this paper, we reach back to 1920 and trace the rise and decline of the policy importance of externalities theory. Beginning with A. C. Pigou and Alfred Marshall, our story includes some of the great figures in economic history of thought. But while theory was being built, institutions were overlooked. Pigou continues to be a dominant player in the story until the 1960s and 1970s when externalities theory was challenged by James M. Buchanan, Ronald Coase and other scholars. It is here in the twilight years of the externalities revolution that the prospects of government failure are raised as being more daunting than the likelihood of market failure. Finally, in the late 1970s and beyond, the externalities revolution is replaced by a property rights revolution.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,174

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Externality and Institutions.Andreas A. Papandreou - 1998 - Oxford University Press UK.
Externalities as a Basis for Regulation: A Philosophical View.Rutger Claassen - 2016 - Journal of Institutional Economics 12 (3):541-563.
Market failure.David Schmidtz - 1993 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 7 (4):525-537.
Externalities and the Limits of Pigovian Policies.Rebecca Livernois - 2024 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 27 (3):428-450.
When Jack and Jill Make a Deal*: DANIEL M. HAUSMAN.Daniel M. Hausman - 1992 - Social Philosophy and Policy 9 (1):95-113.
Regulatory Theory.Matthew D. Adler - 1996 - In Dennis M. Patterson (ed.), A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory. Blackwell. pp. 590–606.
Hanly on Coase: A Comment.Steven G. Medema - 1994 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 11 (1):107-111.
What Do Climate Change Winners Owe, and to Whom?Kian Mintz-Woo & Justin Leroux - 2021 - Economics and Philosophy 37 (3):462-483.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-06-25

Downloads
63 (#338,284)

6 months
4 (#1,255,690)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references