Affiliation:
1. Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA
2. East Texas Baptist University, Marshall, TX, USA
Abstract
This article critiques current undergraduate economics textbooks’ treatment of externalities. Despite a tremendous scholarly pushback since 1920 to Pigou’s path-breaking writings, modern textbook authors fail to synthesize important critiques and extensions of externality theory and policy. The typical textbook treatment (a) does not distinguish pecuniary from technological externalities, (b) is silent about the invisible hand’s unintended and emergent consequences as a positive externality, (c) emphasizes negative relative to positive externalities, (d) ignores Coase’s critique of Pigouvian tax “solutions,” and (e) presents policy “solutions” to negative externalities that ignore inframarginal external benefits that may render “solutions” harmful to social welfare. Aside from attention to “The Coase Theorem” (excerpted from only about four pages of Coase’s voluminous writings), the typical textbook today discusses little of the scholarly critique that emerged in response to Pigou’s anti-market polemic. Imparting economics students with Pigouvian biases is potentially harmful to both them and society because it leaves them ill-prepared to critically assess policy proposals that are alleged to solve externality problems.
Subject
General Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Creative Destruction versus Robert Frank’s Progressive Consumption Tax;Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics;2024-04-08
2. Conclusion;Economic Perspectives on Government;2019-07-10