Category: Economics

Market Failure? Academic Departments

The Angry Professor describes a new budgeting system at LSU:

Several years ago LSU moved to a business model budget. Under this
model, each department has control over its own funds. We might choose,
for example, to give everyone a big raise. Or, we might choose to hire
new faculty. We might purchase equipment, or furniture.

As
with all such schemes, the administration makes sure that they will get
money from somewhere to sustain their bloated salaries. Each department
pays a "tax" to the college, which is determined by enrollments and
indirects as earned in "Year Zero" (the year before the new budget took
effect). If the department fails to generate at least the enrollments
and indirects earned in this year, the college will take the shortfall
out of the departmental budget. We’re not talking about that funny fake
money that colleges usually shuffle around, but real dollars: my
raises.

Some good things have come out this arrangement:

My department and several others have taken
advantage of the new model by "firing" the custodial staff provided by
Physical Facilities and hiring a private contractor to keep the
bathrooms looking spiffy. I must say, the bathroom has never looked
cleaner, and my office carpet has been vacuumed for the first time in
several years.

But, of course, the Angry Professor is angry. 

In the social sciences, every department is trying to offer
statistics courses in house, so we now have about 8 courses titled
"Introduction to Statistics in [insert department name here]." 

But why doesn’t the Coase Theorem and comparative advantage apply?  The problem here can’t be the budgeting.  I suspect a lack of property rights.

Each department is now in direct competition with every other for undergraduate enrollments.

Sounds good to me but the Angry Professor has a rebuttal:

The marginal departments, the ones with the
lowest possible academic standards, are pulling in vast numbers of warm
bodies and the tuition dollars associated with them.
The departments that formerly only provided degrees to the football players are now thriving.

But grade inflation and the incentive to take easy courses in easy departments is nothing new, the only difference is that now the easy departments have funding commensurate with enrollments.  The bottom line, therefore, is that the angry professor is angry at the students for not choosing classes more wisely. 

A better grading system that takes into account the fact that some departments and professors grade easier than others would help students to make better choices.   It’s not obvious to me, however, that on the whole the students aren’t making rational choices.

Thanks to Tom Slee for the pointer.  I hope to say more about his interesting new book, No one Makes You Shop at Wal-Mart, in the future.   Contrary to the title it’s about how markets fail, not a defense of Wal-Mart!

The Limits of Tying

A pen may refuse to dispense ink unless it’s being used with licensed
paper. … A shoe may refuse to provide some features, such as high-tech
cushioning of the sole, unless used with licensed shoelaces. …Will
these things actually happen? I can’t say for sure.

So writes Felten, channeled through CrookedTimber.  This world sounds like fun, but it is unlikely to come about.  Most people wouldn’t buy a pen like that, and even a monopolistic pen supplier (hardly the case) would maximize profit by offering a more valuable product.  Tying has three primary rationales:

1. The main product actually works better with certain accompaniments.  The supplier wishes to either avoid complaints, liability, or damage to reputation.  Your local Denny’s won’t mash together french fries, blueberries, and coffee for you.  Not even if you beg, offer a large tip, or whine about "Markets in Everything."

2. Price discrimination.  Make them buy the printer with a specified printer cartridge.  People who use the printer more need more cartridges.  Under certain conditions, the cartridge can be priced so as to charge the high-value users more for the entire package.  That leads to higher profits than charging everyone the same price, at least if the right conditions are satisfied.  This is usually welfare-improving, I might add, as it leads to higher output.

3. Desire to use one monopoly position to take over another newly opened, declining-cost market.  Tying can give you a first-mover advantage and discourage entrants.  The model here is complicated but it can work out to support this result.  Try this one too, and here.  The iTunes case may be an example here.  Apple wants market power in both the on-line songs and the hardware market, and thinks it can leverage one into the other.  But notice that both markets must be susceptible to monopolization on the cost side, namely the presence of increasing returns for the first and dominant supplier.

In any case, I doubt if iTunes (as we know it) will be the industry standard ten years from now.  And if so?  "Let them listen to Cake!" I am willing to say.

The bottom line: Our pens and paper are safe.

Albert Hirschman

Henry at CrookedTimber asks:

What do libertarians think about Hirschman’s arguments? Do they read him? Do they have a sophisticated response?

My take: Albert Hirschman deserves a Nobel Prize in economics.  His early work on the unbalanced nature of economic development was pathbreaking.  The Rhetoric of Reaction is a brilliant study in intellectual self-deception.  As a historian of thought he integrates wonderfully, such as in his study of how commerce shapes mores

But he would win the Prize for focusing the attention of economists and political scientists on the phenomenon of voice: the ability of consumer or voter complaints to induce improvements in supply.  Hirschman was the first modern social scientist to think about this mechanism systematically.

Hirschman first suggested voice gets stronger and more effective when exit is limited.  In his (earlier) vision, if you can leave you won’t complain.  Fidel Castro understood this and let many Cubans go, although of course they complained from Florida.  It is sometimes suggested that in a world of school vouchers fewer parents would show up at the school board meeting.  Don’t yap, just yank your kid.

In reality voice often works best when competitive pressures are strong.  HBO is more responsive than was East Germany.  You are not wasting your time to complain at Wegman’s, or for that matter at this blog.  Competition and voice are more likely complements than substitutes.  Hirschman admitted and indeed emphasized this point in his later writings.

As far as I know, no one has solved for the proper conditions for when voice is effective.  Here is one recent model.  The general problem is that the motives for voice are poorly understood.

Here is Paul Krugman on Hirschman.  Here is a paper on Hirschman and evolution.  Here is a book on Hirschman.

Addendum: Here is Alex on the topic of voice.  Sadly he and I will not be having a little spat over this one…

Adverse Selection among the Kiwis

The Unknown Professor points us to Pay Peanuts and Get Monkeys? Evidence from Academia a clever paper on adverse selection in academia.  In New Zealand academic salaries are mostly independent of discipline so someone from a high-flying field like economics or finance is giving up a big American salary to teach in NZ compared to say a professor of literature.  As a result, we ought to expect that the greater the salary in the U.S. the lower the quality in New Zealand.

…discipline research performance is indeed
negatively related to the value of outside opportunities: the greater a
discipline’s average salary in United States universities, the weaker
its research performance in New Zealand universities. The latter
apparently get what they pay for: disciplines in which the fixed
compensation is high relative to opportunity cost are best able to
recruit high-quality researchers and/or motivate their researchers to
be productive. Paying (relative) peanuts attracts mainly monkeys.

It’s a good paper, thus I expect the author will soon leave New Zealand.

Markets in everything, Paris Hilton edition

Hilton also told the magazine she collects $500,000 in fees just to show up at parties and other events from Las Vegas to Tokyo. Her best-paying gig, she said, was a recent Austrian appearance.

"I had to say ‘hi’ and tell them why I loved Austria so much," she is quoted as saying.

And why does she like Austria? "Because they pay me $1 million to wave at crowds!"

Here is the full story.

WashingtonWatch

WashingtonWatch.com is a new website that presents estimates of the costs or savings per family or person for a variety of bills.  Here’s the latest DOD budget cost:

S. 2766 would authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2007 for the
military functions of the Department of Defense (DoD), for activities
of the Department of Energy (DOE), and for other purposes, including
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Cost Per Family: $5535.19

The website is a useful collection but be aware that there is no attempt to do any cost-benefit or incidence analysis.  The numbers are just brute government estimates of the total program spending or tax reduction divided by the number of families or persons.  I can guarantee you, for example, that the following calculation for the "average family" is way, way off the mark.

H.R. 5638 makes the estate and gift tax permanent; increases the
estate and gift tax credit to a $5 million effective exclusion amount,
making any unused effective exclusion amount portable between spouses;
and reduces rates, as well as making other changes in tax law.

Savings per average family: $1896.79

China market of the day

A bar in eastern China has come up with a novel way of attracting clients – they are allowed to beat up the staff.

The Rising Sun Anger Release Bar in Nanjing lets customers smash glasses, rant and even hit specially trained workers, state media reported. The owner, Wu Gong, told China Daily that he was inspired to open the bar by his experiences as a migrant worker.

Most of his customers were women working in the service or entertainment industries, he said.  The bar employs 20 men who have been given protective gear and physical training to prepare them for the job.  Clients can ask the men to dress as the character they wish to attack.

Here is the full story, and thanks to Jordan Lampe for the pointer.  Nanjing must be quite a place.  Here is my previous post on The Crying Bar in Nanjing.

The economics of micro-finance

This column is based on my trip to Hyderabad, earlier this year.  Here is part of the introduction:

Microfinance is not actually “micro” in scale. It is far more
organized than the individual moneylenders in poor communities, the
traditional source of finance. Spandana borrows from banks, has about
2,000 employees and deals with about 800,000 loan recipients. The
resulting economies of scale make possible lower interest rates.
Spandana has been lending at interest rates of 10 to 15 percent a year,
while other Indian microlenders may have rates ranging up to about 30
percent a year. Traditional moneylenders receive 5 or 10 percent a
month or more. It is no wonder that Spandana has grown.

Spandana
seeks to earn a profit through higher repayment rates. Unlike the
moneylenders, Spandana lends to small groups of 5 to 10 people rather
than to individuals; each member is liable if other group borrowers do
not repay. The carrot is that good borrowers become eligible to receive
higher sums.

Yes I am a fan of micro-finance.  One overlooked benefit is that the weekly repayments enforce fiscal discipline and responsibility on the borrowing families.  Otherwise the money often goes to deadbeat relatives.  Here is the full article.

Does the Sugar Quota make you Fat?

I don’t know whether High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) acts more like fat than does sugar (compare here and here) but it’s worthwhile pointing out that HFCS is a child of the sugar quota.  The import quotas raise the US price of sugar well above the world price (~24 cents per pound compared to ~9 cents per pound) and encourage consumption of HFCS.  Reflecting this fact, the main defenders of the sugar quota are no longer Florida sugar growers but rather mid-West corn growers.

Neue Zürcher Zeitung article

von Gerhard Schwartz:

Das Faszinosum der Vielfalt

Die verschiedenen Welten des Ökonomieprofessors Tyler Cowen

S. Es ist nicht ungewöhnlich, aber doch immer wieder wohltuend überraschend, wenn man feststellt, dass die grössten Bewunderer der Schweiz Ausländer sind. Einer davon ist Tyler Cowen. Er ist zumindest in einschlägigen Kreisen bekannt als ein Experte in Sachen Kunstökonomie (oder wohl eher: Kulturökonomie). Der 44-Jährige unterrichtet Wirtschaftswissenschaften an der renommierten George Mason University und hat bei den besten Verlagen insgesamt elf Bücher veröffentlicht, darunter «Good & Plenty: The Creative Successes of American Arts Funding», das dieses Jahr bei Princeton University Press erscheint, «Creative Destruction: How Globalization is Changing the World’s Cultures» (2002) oder «In Praise of Commercial Culture» (1998).

Sein Besuch in der Schweiz verdankt sich einer Einladung der Zürcher Progress Foundation, an deren «Economic Conference» vom Juni er über Kulturförderung aus amerikanischer Perspektive spricht. Cowen tut dies zwar mit viel Detailkenntnis, er nutzt aber seinen Auftritt zugleich, um der Schweiz ans Herz zu legen, doch ja ihre Eigenarten in allen Belangen, auch im Kulturellen, zu bewahren, und sich deshalb ja nicht der EU anzuschliessen. Dass dies nicht romantische Verklärung einer Schweiz, die es so gar nicht mehr gibt, ist, zeigt sich im Laufe des Vortrages und im anschliessenden Gespräch. Cowen wechselt zum Schluss auf Deutsch, das er bemerkenswert gut spricht, und er gibt zu erkennen, dass er in den meisten Kantonen der Schweiz schon mehrmals war, und zwar auch an durchaus abgelegenen und unspektakulären Orten.

Die Begeisterung und Kenntnis geht nicht zuletzt auf einen einjährigen Studienaufenthalt an der Universität Freiburg im Breisgau 1985–86 zurück. Er hat dort, wie er etwas schelmisch gesteht, nicht in erster Linie Ökonomie studiert, sondern Deutsch gelernt und sich mit europäischer, vor allem deutschsprachiger Kultur beschäftigt.  Cowen scheint denn auch kleinere Museen, die Spielpläne der grossen Opernhäuser oder weniger bekannte Künstler aus Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz wie selbstverständlich aus dem Gedächtnis abrufen zu können, so, als ob sein Fach nicht die «dismal science» der Ökonomie wäre, sondern Musik oder Kunstgeschichte.

Noch begeisterter als von seinem Fach und von Kultur – unser Gesprächspartner, der auch Spanisch spricht, sammelt unter anderem mexikanische sowie haitianische Volkskunst und besitzt Tausende von CD – ist er aber von seinem Blog, www.marginalrevolution.com. Das «Wall Street Journal» nannte diesen 2004 einen der vier besten ökonomischen Blogs im Netz. Cowen hat ihn vor rund drei Jahren gestartet und betreibt ihn zusammen mit seinem Kollegen Alex Tabarrok täglich – 365 Tage im Jahr –, er schreibt Texte, weist auf neue Publikationen hin, stellt Links zu anderen Anbietern von Informationen her. Mit 5,5 Millionen verschiedenen Besuchern seit der Gründung und 20 000 bis 30 000 Besuchern täglich ist er im Urteil Cowens auch der grösste ökonomische Blog in den USA. Da er naturgemäss viele Reaktionen erhält, investiert er täglich ein bis zwei Stunden in dieses «Hobby». Die Reaktion seiner Frau, einer gebürtigen Russin, auf die Zeitangabe lässt allerdings vermuten, dass die Zeit wohl etwas höher anzusetzen ist.

Die Spannbreite der Themen ist enorm, da finden sich Betrachtungen über den Krieg im Nahen Osten, über Frankreichs Reichensteuer oder über die Ursachen der landwirtschaftlichen Revolution ebenso wie eine ökonomische Interpretation von Dürrenmatts «Besuch der alten Dame», eine Aufzählung schwieriger Fragen, die Cowen gerne seinen Gesprächspartnern beim Mittagessen stellt, eine Analyse der Flugpreise bei Internet-Buchung oder Überlegungen zu Freundschaft und Erotik. Als roter Faden zieht sich durch alle Texte, Hinweise und Links die ökonomische und liberale Perspektive. Daneben betreibt der vielseitige Professor auch noch einen Restaurantführer für Washington auf dem Internet. Doch dahinter steckt durchaus ein tieferer Sinn: Die Die Küche zählt für ihn, als wäre er ein Franzose, ganz selbstverständlich zur Kultur, und die Globalisierung, die die ethnischen Küchen auf der ganzen Welt verbreitet hat, empfindet er auch von daher als kulturelle Bereicherung.

Creative Destruction

Or should I have titled this post "Against National Champions"?  Here is Kathy Fogel, Randall Morck, and Bernard Yeung:

What is good for big business need not generally advance a country’s
overall economy. Big business turnover correlates with rising income,
productivity, and (in high income countries) faster capital
accumulation; consistent with Schumpeter’s (1912) creative destruction
and recent formalizations like Aghion and Howitt (1992). Turnover
appears to “cause” growth; and disappearing behemoths, more than rising
stars, drive our results. Stronger findings suggest more intense
creative destruction in countries with higher incomes, as well as those
with smaller governments, Common Law courts, smaller banking systems,
stronger shareholder rights, and more open economies. Only the last
matters more in lower income countries.

Here is the paper.