IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v145y2017icp150-161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The tradeoff of the commons under stochastic use

Author

Listed:
  • Cao, Xiaoyong
  • Gong, Jiong

Abstract

We develop a model of scarce renewable resources to study the problem of the commons. Our model formulation differs from the existing literature in that it assumes the use of the commons to be stochastic in nature. One example is microwave spectrum for mobile and wireless communications. We investigate three mechanisms of resource allocation: free usage, the exclusive franchise, and a regulated monopoly. We show that the welfare tradeoff among these three mechanisms depends on the characteristics of the commons and their usage patterns. In particular, we find that property rights are not always the best solution. We then make four extensions that apply to spectrum allocations.

Suggested Citation

  • Cao, Xiaoyong & Gong, Jiong, 2017. "The tradeoff of the commons under stochastic use," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 150-161.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:145:y:2017:i:c:p:150-161
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.11.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272716301578
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.11.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas W. Hazlett & Roberto E. Muñoz, 2009. "A welfare analysis of spectrum allocation policies," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 424-454, September.
    2. McAfee, R. Preston & Miller, Alan D., 2012. "The tradeoff of the commons," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 349-353.
    3. Thomas W. Hazlett, 2008. "Optimal Abolition of FCC Spectrum Allocation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 103-128, Winter.
    4. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(2), pages 124-124.
    5. Minervini, Leo Fulvio, 2014. "Spectrum management reform: Rethinking practices," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 136-146.
    6. Brennan, Timothy J, 1998. "The Spectrum as Commons: Tomorrow's Vision, Not Today's Prescription," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 791-803, October.
    7. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 9, pages 178-203, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. R. Preston McAfee & John McMillan, 1996. "Analyzing the Airwaves Auction," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 159-175, Winter.
    9. Hazlett, Thomas W, 1998. "Spectrum Flash Dance: Eli Noam's Proposal for "Open Access" to Radio Waves," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 805-820, October.
    10. Anthony Scott, 1955. "The Fishery: The Objectives of Sole Ownership," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(2), pages 116-116.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McAfee, R. Preston & Miller, Alan D., 2012. "The tradeoff of the commons," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 349-353.
    2. Richard Schwindt & Aidan R. Vining & David Weimer, 2003. "A Policy Analysis of the BC Salmon Fishery," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 29(1), pages 73-93, March.
    3. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Catherine J. Morrison Paul & Ronald G. Felthoven & Marcelo de O. Torres, 2010. "Productive performance in fisheries: modeling, measurement, and management," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(3), pages 343-360, July.
    5. Pies, Ingo, 2012. "Optimierung versus Koordinierung: Zur ordonomischen Klärung des wirtschaftsethischen Problems," Discussion Papers 2012-21, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    6. Behringer, Stefan & Upmann, Thorsten, 2014. "Optimal harvesting of a spatial renewable resource," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 105-120.
    7. Geoffrey Fishburn & Murray C. Kemp, 2014. "The Gain from International Trade in Pool Goods and Private Goods," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 167-169, February.
    8. Brander, James A. & Scott Taylor, M., 1998. "Open access renewable resources: Trade and trade policy in a two-country model," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 181-209, April.
    9. Bruno Drouot, 2012. "Les facteurs explicatifs de la dépendance économique des patrons pêcheurs à une ressource naturelle : le cas de la pêcherie de bar commun en France," Post-Print hal-01870830, HAL.
    10. Grafton, R. Quentin & Kompas, Tom & Chu, Long & Che, Nhu, 2010. "Maximum economic yield," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(3), pages 1-8.
    11. Gardner Brown, 2000. "Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use Without Markets," Working Papers 0025, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    12. Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Problem of the Commons: Still Unsettled after 100 Years," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 81-108, February.
    13. Catherine Benjamin & Hervé Guyomard, 1996. "Analyse des modes de régulation publique des pêcheries : applicabilité d'un système de quotas individuels transférables à l'Union européenne," Working Papers hal-01897091, HAL.
    14. Gissurarson Hannes H., 2000. "When Ideas Conspire with Circumstances: Introducing Individual Transferable Quotas in Fisheries," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2-3), pages 285-314, June.
    15. López, Ramón & Schiff, Maurice, 2013. "Interactive dynamics between natural and man-made assets: The impact of external shocks," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 1-15.
    16. James A. Brander & M. Scott Taylor, 1997. "International Trade and Open-Access Renewable Resources: The Small Open Economy Case," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 30(3), pages 526-552, August.
    17. Gordon Munro & U. Sumaila, 2015. "On the Contributions of Colin Clark to Fisheries Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(1), pages 1-17, May.
    18. Bellanger, Manuel & Fonner, Robert & Holland, Daniel S. & Libecap, Gary D. & Lipton, Douglas W. & Scemama, Pierre & Speir, Cameron & Thébaud, Olivier, 2021. "Cross-sectoral externalities related to natural resources and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    19. Darcy W E Allen, 2020. "When Entrepreneurs Meet:The Collective Governance of New Ideas," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number q0269, September.
    20. Manuel Pacheco Coelho, 2011. "“On Rents of Fishing Grounds” Revisited," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 1(2), pages 1-74.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Commons; Pricing; Welfare;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C60 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - General
    • H42 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Private Goods
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation

    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:eee:pubeco:v:145:y:2017:i:c:p:150-161. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505578 .

    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.