2016The American EconomistRequires access

The Greatest Externality Story (N)ever Told

James E. McClure, Tyler Watts

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

This article critiques current undergraduate economics textbooks’ treatment of externalities. Despite a tremendous scholarly pushback since 1920 to Pigou’s path-breaking writings, modern textbook authors fail to synthesize important critiques and extensions of externality theory and policy. The typical textbook treatment (a) does not distinguish pecuniary from technological externalities, (b) is silent about the invisible hand’s unintended and emergent consequences as a positive externality, (c) emphasizes negative relative to positive externalities, (d) ignores Coase’s critique of Pigouvian tax “solutions,” and (e) presents policy “solutions” to negative externalities that ignore inframarginal external benefits that may render “solutions” harmful to social welfare. Aside from attention to “The Coase Theorem” (excerpted from only about four pages of Coase’s voluminous writings), the typical textbook today discusses little of the scholarly critique that emerged in response to Pigou’s anti-market polemic. Imparting economics students with Pigouvian biases is potentially harmful to both them and society because it leaves them ill-prepared to critically assess policy proposals that are alleged to solve externality problems.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article critiques current undergraduate economics textbooks’ treatment of externalities. Despite a tremendous scholarly pushback since 1920 to Pigou’s path-breaking writings, modern textbook authors fail to synthesize important critiques and extensions of externality theory and policy. The typical textbook treatment (a) does not distinguish pecuniary from technological externalities, (b) is silent about the invisible hand’s unintended and emergent consequences as a positive externality, (c) emphasizes negative relative to positive externalities, (d) ignores Coase’s critique of Pigouvian tax “solutions,” and (e) presents policy “solutions” to negative externalities that ignore inframarginal external benefits that may render “solutions” harmful to social welfare. Aside from attention to “The Coase Theorem” (excerpted from only about four pages of Coase’s voluminous writings), the typical textbook today discusses little of the scholarly critique that emerged in response to Pigou’s anti-market polemic. Imparting economics students with Pigouvian biases is potentially harmful to both them and society because it leaves them ill-prepared to critically assess policy proposals that are alleged to solve externality problems.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article critiques current undergraduate economics textbooks’ treatment of externalities. Despite a tremendous scholarly pushback since 1920 to Pigou’s path-breaking writings, modern textbook authors fail to synthesize important critiques and extensions of externality theory and policy. The typical textbook treatment (a) does not distinguish pecuniary from technological externalities, (b) is silent about the invisible hand’s unintended and emergent consequences as a positive externality, (c) emphasizes negative relative to positive externalities, (d) ignores Coase’s critique of Pigouvian tax “solutions,” and (e) presents policy “solutions” to negative externalities that ignore inframarginal external benefits that may render “solutions” harmful to social welfare. Aside from attention to “The Coase Theorem” (excerpted from only about four pages of Coase’s voluminous writings), the typical textbook today discusses little of the scholarly critique that emerged in response to Pigou’s anti-market polemic. Imparting economics students with Pigouvian biases is potentially harmful to both them and society because it leaves them ill-prepared to critically assess policy proposals that are alleged to solve externality problems.

Key concepts: Coase theorem, Pigou effect, Externality, Economics, Aside, Neoclassical economics, Positive economics, Welfare

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Greatest Externality Story (N)ever Told — Research Paper | ScholarLens