Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

How does the problem of limited and bundled choice in the public sector relate to economic efficiency? Why are public bureaucracies possibly less efficient than business firms?

Short Answer

Expert verified

Economic inefficiency in the public sector arises due to the poor selection of goods/programs that are offered in a bundled choice that involves efficient and inefficient goods/programs together at the same time.

Public bureaucracies are less efficient because they are run by welfare motive and do not process the concept of internal efficiency.

Step by step solution

01

Inefficiency in the public sector

Different goods, services, programs, or policies are clubbed together in different sectors in the public sector. This leaves lesser options for selection. The bundled stocks of programs/policies may have positive and negative benefits altogether. This leads to economic inefficiency only if there is a poor selection (the total cost of the selection exceeds its total benefits).

For instance, candidates in the assembly elections present an allocation of resources as a party's agenda to gather votes. The allocation includes different programs and policies in certain combinations, which could be beneficial for some and bad for others. The public must agree on one out of the limited choices to choose their next representative.

Economic inefficiency arises when the selected bundle (or representative) creates losses in terms of certain policies. This cannot be ignored as the limited bundles offer both good and bad options together in the same bundle.

Thus, the legislation and the public have to accept that stock which has a greater net positive effect. However, it will include the negative impacts as well, creating economic inefficiency.

02

Public bureaucracies less efficient than private firms

Public bureaucracies are relatively less efficient than business firms because of the following reasons:

  • Unlike private firms, public bureaucracies do not run for profit motives (benefit >cost). They carry on the functioning even if they fail to manage their resources properly. They have the burden of uplifting the sick units of the economy, and their motive is the welfare of society. So, to improve society, they pay the economic efficiency as the opportunity cost.
  • Business firms provide incentives to their employees at each hierarchal stage to work efficiently. The incentives may be in the form of shared profit, bonuses, salary hikes, or promotions. Public organizations do not offer such incentives to their employees to encourage efficient working in the organizations.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

On the basis of the three individual demand schedules in the following table, and assuming these are the only three people in the society, determine (a) the market demand schedule on the assumption that the good is a private good and (b) the collective demand schedule on the assumption that the good is a public good.

P($)QdD1
QdD2
QdD3
8010
7020
6031
5142
4253
3364
2475
1586

"The problem with our democratic institutions is that they don't correctly reflect the will of the people! If the peopleโ€”rather than self-interested politicians or lobbyistsโ€”had control, we wouldn't have to worry about the government taking actions that don't maximize allocative and productive efficiency." Critique.

Consider a specific example of the special-interest effect and the collective-action problem. In 2012, it was estimated that the total value of all corn-production subsidies in the United States was about \(3 billion. The population of the United States was approximately 300 million people that year.

a. On average, how much did corn subsidies cost per person in the United States in 2012? (Hint: A billion is a 1 followed by nine zeros. A million is a 1 followed by six zeros.)

b. If each person in the United States is willing to spend only \)0.50 to support efforts to overturn the corn subsidy, and if anti-subsidy advocates can only raise funds from 10 percent of the population, how much money will they be able to raise for their lobbying efforts?

c. If the recipients of corn subsidies donate just 1 percent of the total amount that they receive in subsidies, how much could they raise to support lobbying efforts to continue the corn subsidy?

d. By how many dollars does the amount raised by the recipients of the corn subsidy exceed the amount raised by the opponents of the corn subsidy?

โ€œMajority voting ensures that government will produce only those public goods for which benefits exceed costs.โ€ Discuss.

Tammy Hall is the mayor of a large US city. She has just established the Office of Window Safety. Because windows sometimes break and spray glass shards, every window in the city will now have to pass an annual safety inspection. Property owners must pay the $5-per-window inspection costโ€”and by the way, Tammy has made her nephew the new head of the Office of Window Safety. This new policy is an example of _______.

a. political corruption

b. earmarks

c. rent-seeking

d. adverse selection

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free