Books.org participates in affiliate programs including Bookshop.org and the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. We may earn a commission from qualifying purchases made through links on this page, at no additional cost to you.
Overview
When should government intervene in market activity and when is it best to let market forces take their natural course? How does the existing empirical evidence about government performance guide our answers to these questions? In this clear, concise book, Clifford Winston offers his innovative analysis —shaped by thirty years of evidence —to assess the efficacy of government interventions.
Markets fail when it is possible to make one person better off without making someone else worse off, thus indicating inefficiency. Governments fail when an intervention is unwarranted because markets are performing well or when the intervention fails to correct a market problem efficiently. Winston concludes from existing research that the cost of government failure may actually be considerably greater than the cost of market failure: "My search of the evidence is not limited to policy failures. I will report success stories, but few of them emerged from my search." The prevalence of market failure is due to a lack of conviction in favor of markets, the inflexibility of intervening government agencies, and political forces that enable certain interest groups to benefit at the expense of society as a whole. Winston suggests that government policy can be improved by making greater use of market-oriented solutions that have already produced benefits in certain situations.
Synopsis
When should government intervene in market activity? When is it best to let market forces simply take their natural course? How does existing empirical evidence about government performance inform those decisions? Brookings economist Clifford Winston uses these questions to frame a frank empirical assessment of government economic intervention in Government Failure vs. Market Failure: Microeconomics Policy Research and Government Performance.
Markets "fail" when it is possible to make one person better off without making someone else worse off, thus indicating some degree of inefficiency. In economics parlance, Pareto optimality has not been achieved. On the other hand, governments "fail" when an economic intervention proves to be unwarranted, either because markets are performing adequately or public policy does not correct a market failure efficiently. In such cases, government intervention may actually exacerbate a problem or produce unintended negative results. Winston concludes that the cost of government failure may actually be considerably greater than the cost of market failure: "My search of the evidence is not limited to policy failures. I will report success stories, but few of them emerged." Government failure may result in missed opportunities, wasted resources, and waning public support.
The author, a well-respected economist who edited the Brookings Papers on Microeconomic Activity, calls for more economics research that is geared to questions of public policy: "The economics profession should encourage a broader range as well as different styles of research by giving more respect to high-quality policy studies on specific and perhaps small issues that accumulate in importance." He cites evidence that inefficient microeconomics policies are of vital importance because they are a drag on growth and development.
"This authoritative and readable monograph provides much-needed balance in the implicit debate between those who hold that the public interest requires extensive government economic intervention and the position that free markets automatically solve all problems. Legislators and economists have focused on needs for intervention, but Winston shows that it sometimes does more harm than good, and its favored methods can be fonts of inefficiency."
William J. Baumol, Berkley Center for Entrepreneurial Studies, NYU
Editorials
From The Critics
"This authoritative and readable monograph provides much-needed balance in the implicit debate between those who hold that the public interest requires extensive government economic intervention and the position that free markets automatically solve all problems. Legislators and economists have focused on needs for intervention, but Winston shows that it sometimes does more harm than good, and its favored methods can be fonts of inefficiency."William J. Baumol, Berkley Center for Entrepreneurial Studies, NYU