IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v7y1987i01p43-70_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market and Non-Market Failures: Comparison and Assessment1

Author

Listed:
  • Wolf, Charles

Abstract

This paper aims to redress the asymmetry in the standard economic treatment of the shortcomings of markets and governments by developing and applying a theory of ‘nonmarket’ failure– that is, of government failure – so that the comparison between markets and governments can be made more systematically, and choices between them arrived at more intelligently. Several conclusions are drawn. First, the choice between markets and governments is not a pure one, actual systems inevitably involve combinations between markets and governments. Second, with respect to both static and dynamic efficiency criteria, markets generally do better than governments. Third, there are various ways in which government can contribute to improving the functioning of markets. Fourth, market forces can play a useful role in improving the functioning of government and reducing the incidence of nonmarket failures.

Suggested Citation

  • Wolf, Charles, 1987. "Market and Non-Market Failures: Comparison and Assessment1," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 43-70, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:7:y:1987:i:01:p:43-70_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X00004347/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Grubb & Alexandra Poncia & Paul Drummond & Karsten Neuhoff & Jean-Charles Hourcade, 2023. "Policy complementarity and the paradox of carbon pricing," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 39(4), pages 711-730.
    2. Bernard Gumah & Maxwell A. Aziabah, 2020. "“Our Lives Are Affected by Government Agencies†: Citizens’ Perception Survey as a Measure of Public Service Efficiency in Ghana," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, June.
    3. Baum, Donald R. & Cooper, Rachel & Lusk-Stover, Oni, 2018. "Regulating market entry of low-cost private schools in Sub-Saharan Africa: Towards a theory of private education regulation," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 100-112.
    4. Christopher J. Webster, 1998. "Public Choice, Pigouvian and Coasian Planning Theory," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 35(1), pages 53-75, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:7:y:1987:i:01:p:43-70_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.