| Abstract: |
The concept of public goods is confusing because it confounds three
analytically distinct concepts: excludability, rivalry, and public finance.
Pure public goods are of limited relevance as an explanation of government
spending. To make matters worse, the broader policy community uses the term in
ways that invoke different means of both “public” and “good” than economists
favour. For example, “global public goods” describe everything from the global
environment, international financial stability and market efficiency, to
health, knowledge, peace and security and humanitarian rights. In this essay,
I argue for radically reducing the emphasis placed on public goods in the
standard undergraduate public finance curriculum, and instead emphasizing the
fundamental underlying issues of exclusion, rivalry, and public
finance/provision. The ultimate aim of an undergraduate course in public
expenditure should, I argue, be to explain government spending. |