Lably
Skip to content

Government failure

Economic inefficiency

  • 9 min read
  • 5 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Public good, Tax and Regulation

Like market failure, government failure does not refer to the absence of a preferred outcome, but to the prevention of an efficient one, and can arise even where an efficient market solution was available. It is defined by inefficiency, rather than distribution: creating winners and losers doesn't by itself is a government failure. The defining feature of a government failure is the availability of an unrealised Pareto improvement—a change that could make everyone better off in a different arrangement.

Government may intervene by provision, taxation or subsidy, and regulation; and a government failure can arise from any of these. Such failure could be either on the demand side or on the supply side. Demand-side failures include preference-revelation problems and the illogic of voting and collective behaviour. Supply-side failures largely result from principal–agent problem. Frequently cited mechanisms and instances of government failure include regulatory capture and regulatory arbitrage, the unintended consequences of an intervention, and cases where an inefficient outcome is more feasible politically than the Pareto improvement to it.

History

The phrase "government failure" emerged as a term of art in the early 1960s with the rise of intellectual and political criticism of government regulations. Building on the premise that the only legitimate rationale for government regulation was market failure, some economists in public choice developed new theories of how governments can make costly, failure-prone, or ill-advised interventions into markets, creating worse outcomes than the market failure itself.

An early use of "government failure" was by Ronald Coase (1964) in comparing an actual and ideal system of industrial regulation:

"Contemplation of an optimal system may provide techniques of analysis that would otherwise have been missed and, in certain special cases, it may go far to providing a solution. But in general its influence has been pernicious. It has directed economists’ attention away from the main question, which is how alternative arrangements will actually work in practice. It has led economists to derive conclusions for economic policy from a study of an abstract of a market situation. It is no accident that in the literature...we find a category "market failure" but no category "government failure." Until we realize that we are choosing between social arrangements which are all more or less failures, we are not likely to make much headway."

Roland McKean used the term in 1965 to suggest limitations on an invisible-hand notion of government behavior. More formal and general analysis followed in such areas as development economics, ecological economics, political science, political economy, public choice theory, and transaction-cost economics. Later, due to the popularity of public choice theory in 1970s, government failure attracted the attention of the academic community.

Sign in to keep reading

4 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Economics