Why the Traditional Distinction between Public and Private Goods Should be Abandoned

Jesse Malkin and Aaron Wildavsky

Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1991, vol. 3, issue 4, 355-378

Abstract: In this paper we challenge the traditional distinction between public goods and private goods. Economists use a definition of public goods that rests on the inherent properties of the good itself. Referring to criteria such as non-rivalness and non-excludability, they assert that the distinction is fixed in nature and cannot be altered by human observes. We argue that the boundary between public and private goods is socially constructed. That is, what is a public good and what is a private good is not determined by fixed criteria; rather it is decided by society. Thus, what is a public good in one community might be a private good in another. It is this moveable boundary between public and private that makes it essential to analyźe public policy with values up front, not hidden behind the seemingly technical concept of public goods.

Keywords: non-excludability; non-rivalness; private goods; public goods; social construction (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1991
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951692891003004001 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:3:y:1991:i:4:p:355-378

DOI: 10.1177/0951692891003004001

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Theoretical Politics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().