Should governments always intervene in the markets to correct problems when free markets fail to allocate resources efficiently? [15]

What is market failure? Market failure is defined as the situation where the free market fails to achieve allocative efficiency – the market fails to achieve an outcome that maximizes society’s welfare. Government intervention during market failure may in certain cases be justified, but in other cases unjustified. This essay intends to discuss if government intervention in markets that fail is justified and effective, by addressing and focusing on the economic problem of externalities, demerit goods, and the lack of provision of public goods. 

Governments can utilise various methods to address externalities and demerit goods. Externalities are third party spillover effects, and can be both positive and negative, and can come from consumption or production sides. Demerit goods are goods that either cause negative externalities, or are goods that governments deem unacceptable for their citizens, for instance smoking and gambling. In the case of negative externalities and demerit goods, when goods are over-consumed as their marginal social costs exceed the marginal social benefit, the government may adapt the use of an output tax to prevent the over-consumption of the good. 

[Insert a diagram on output tax showing how this policy cures the problem]

Imposing a tax per unit that is equal to the MEC shifts the MPC to the left. The new private equilibrium now coincides with the new social equilibrium Qs where MSB = MSC. Allocative efficiency is achieved as the output has been reduced to the social optimal level and therefore government intervention is justified.

Alternatively, the government may also impose an output quota which is defined as the limit for the quantity that the industry can legally produce, therefore effectively reducing the over-consumption of the good generating either negative externalities or demerit goods.

[Insert a diagram for output quota showing how this policy cures the problem]

The original equilibrium is determined by the intersection of MSC and MSB. When the government imposes a quota, the new equilibrium price increased while output falls. Therefore, the quota effectively increases the equilibrium price and decreases the equilibrium quantity of the good.

In the case of positive externalities and merit goods, the government may choose to adopt the policy of subsidies to effectively reduce the extent of under-consumption of the good, to raise the consumption or production of a good to bring about a more socially desirable outcome.

[Insert diagram on subsidies showing how this policy cures the problem]

Giving producers a per unit subsidy that is equal to MEB lowers their production costs and shifts the MPC to the right. The initial social equilibrium of Qs where MSB = MSC now coincides with the new private equilibrium. Allocative efficiency is now achieved as output is now raised to the socially optimal level.

Alternatively, the government may also provide for the good completely free to the society, so as to reduce the extent of under-consumption of the good that brings about positive externalities or merit goods. Also, in the case of public goods, there is a missing market and usually governments have to provide the good for society. Public goods are goods that are non rival and non excludable, which means that they cannot be "used up" when someone consumes them, such that there is less of the good for others, and which means that no one can be excluded from the consumption of the good, respectively. For instance, defence and street lighting are both public goods because they are non rival and non excludable goods. These two conditions of non-rivalry and non-excludability imply that the good has MC = 0, and also that there will be free riders, and therefore profit oriented companies simply will not produce the good as they are assumed to be profit driven. 

[Insert diagram on free provision of goods showing how this policy cures the problems (plural)]

For free provision, the social outcome where output is at Qs, is when MSB = MSC. When the output is subsidized, MSC shifts to the right, where the socially optimal output of Qs is achieved. Therefore the effective price of the good is now zero and the entire cost of the good generating positive externalities or merit goods is now absolutely borne by the government.

However, although government intervention in the market may seemingly be beneficial in helping to shift prices and output to the socially desirable outcomes, they may not always be justified, as there are limitations to it as well. In the case of demerit goods and externalities, high implementation, enforcement and mentoring costs may be incurred by the government in fulfilling its role as an interventionist and thus the total administrative costs may exceed the benefits from implementing such measures, leading to an overall decline in society’s welfare. Taxing the public may also be politically unpopular and therefore hinder governments from implementing such measures by placing political interest over economic ones. 

Moreover, in the case of merit goods and positive externalities, using subsidies to resolve the problems posed may be economically costly and full provision may lead to over-production and over-consumption beyond the socially optimal level and therefore lead to allocative inefficiency as well, therefore proving that government intervention is not justifies and not effective to a large extent. 

Hence, in the final analysis, whilst government intervention in the case, where market failure arises, may be beneficial to a limited extent in helping society to maximize its welfare, in the long term, the costs of government intervention may far exceed the short term benefits enjoyed by society as seen in the limitation of using subsidies, quotas, taxes and free provision. Therefore, markets should be rid of government intervention to a maximal extent, because it is only effective in the short run and to minimal extents and therefore is unjustified as a whole.

JC Economics Essays - H1, H2 A level Economics - tutor's comments on the essay: This economics paper is clear cut, direct, and to the point, and tries its best to answer the question. There are of course a few improvements which can be made to it - try to think about what the improvements are. However, more importantly, as this is a 15 mark examination question, it is the part (b) from another part (a) question, and therefore linked to it in a particular way. Economics exam questions on market failure at H1 and H2 levels often ask for explanation in part (a) of the question, followed by deeper analysis and more evaluative comments on the same topic in the second part of the essay. This is an important thing to note - explanation will not get the highest marks here, but analysis and deeper thinking. Perhaps you could focus on the essay's well-written conclusion, which evaluates market failure and the impact of government intervention. This makes this economics essay come to a well-reasoned, nuanced, balanced, evaluative conclusion, which greatly helps the essay get higher examination marks. Thanks for reading and cheers. Special thanks to AG, who will surely be an outstanding undergraduate candidate at Nanyang Technological University, and the other students who made this essay possible: SH, JC, NT, M, and SS. Thanks for reading and cheers. 

Explain, with relevant examples, the situations when prices determined by the intersection of demand and supply do not correctly reflect the costs and benefits, and how these situations lead to market failure in the free market.

The topic addressed in this economics paper is market failure in competitive markets. Prices do not always accurately reflect the costs and benefits of the market, thus leading to market failure in the case of positive and negative externalities, merit and demerit goods. This essay aims to identify the circumstances when prices do not correctly reflect the costs and benefits of the market and explain how markets fail as a result.

Firstly, negative externalities are defined as the adverse spillover effects on third parties arising from the production or consumption of a good. Third parties refer to people who are not directly involved in the transaction of a good. An example of negative externalities would be evident in the case of production, where plants may discharge industrial waste into the environment and therefore cause health and environmental risks to nearby residents. In addition, in the case of consumption, the existence of alcoholics may pose as a threat to the peace and security of law abiding people and society at large. Therefore, negative externalities result in the marginal social costs exceeding the marginal private costs in society, causing deadweight loss.

[Insert diagram for negative externality in production]

Without government intervention, the private equilibrium occurs where MPB = MPC, but the social equilibrium occurs where MSB = MSC. Between Qs and Qp, since MSC > MSB, the triangle pointing towards Qs represents the negative welfare generated and therefore the good is over-produced in the case of negative externalities, leading to market failure. 

Positive externalities, on the other hand, refer to the benefits enjoyed by third parties from the production and consumption of the good. In the case of production, for example, receiving a complete education up till or beyond the tertiary level will not only benefit the student himself but also the society collectively as a whole due to his contribution to the society through application of his knowledge. Likewise, in the case of consumption, for example, vaccination not only reduces the risk of contracting a disease in the vaccinated person, but also reduces the risk of diseases for third parties coming into contact with him. Thus there are greater marginal social benefits than costs but the good may be under-consumed by the society.

[Insert diagram on positive externality in production]

When there is no government intervention, the private equilibrium is where MPB = MPC. The social equilibrium however is at MSB = MSC. Between Qp and Qs, as MSB > MSC, the loss in potential welfare of the society is represented by the triangle pointing towards Qs. Therefore the good is under-produced in the case of positive externalities, leading to market failure.

Furthermore, merit goods refer to goods in which the state believes will be under-consumed if left to the free market because some individuals are unable to factor in the full private benefits of consumption. For example, a student may decide to leave school early to work as he perceive the short term benefits of working to be greater than the long term benefits of receiving a complete education, therefore unknowingly undermining the marginal private benefits he has brought to himself.

[Insert diagram on merit good]

For merit good, the private outcome is Qp where MPB = MPC, whereas the social outcome is Qs where MSC = MSB. Between Qp and Qs, since MSB > MSC, there is a loss in potential welfare represented by the triangle pointing towards Qs, and the good is under-consumed, thereby leading to market failure. 

Demerit goods are goods that the state believes will be over-consumed if left to the free market forces because some individuals are unable to factor in the dull private costs of consumption. For example, goods like alcohol and cigarettes may result in severe health and financial problems when excessively consumed and since there are people that still consume them thinking that the marginal private costs do not exceed the marginal private benefits, when it is in reality, thus results in market failure. 

[Insert diagram on demerit good]

For demerit good, the private outcome is when MPC = MPB at Qp, while the social outcome is at Qs when MSC = MSB. Between Qp and Qs, since MSC > MSB, this results in a deadweight loss represented by the triangle pointing towards Qs, where the good is over-consumed in the case of demerit goods. 

In conclusion, prices do not always accurately reflect their costs and benefits of the market. As seen in the cases of merit goods and positive externalities, the goods are under-consumed by the society although the marginal social benefits outweigh the marginal social costs, and in the case of negative externalities and demerit goods, the marginal social costs outweigh the marginal social benefits and the goods are over-consumed. Therefore, the deadweight loss – the loss in potential welfare of the society due to the over-consumption and under-consumption of goods leads to market failure.

JC Economics Essays - H1, H2, H3 sample essays - tutor's comments: Market failure and the operation of the free market under conditions of perfect competition are important economics topics for both Economics at A levels and introductory undergraduate economics courses, and as such this might be a useful topic to prepare for examinations. It might be a good idea to get a firm understanding of how markets operate and how market failure distorts the workings of the price mechanism as it allocates resources. In this section on comments on the above economics paper, instead of providing general feedback or pointing out what went well and went not so well with it, I will ask questions instead: using Bloom's taxonomy as an intellectual framework to address this economics essay, has the student identified the topic properly, defined and explained key terms, drawn the right diagrams, explained the economic theory with real world examples, explained the diagrams drawn, and come to a reasoned, fair, nuanced conclusion? What has the essay writer done well, and what has the essay writer got to improve on and make better? Are there economics materials that you would have added, and why are these additional concepts, ideas, and arguments important and relevant? Think through these issues. I should give a hint for an important enduring understanding: structure is important to good essay writing, and this economics paper is well structured and well laid out. Always remember to improve on your writing skills, and craft well-thought-out, clear economics essays. Special thanks to S S and A G once again for their useful, relevant, and interesting contributions. Thanks for reading and cheers. 

Explain with relevant examples why imperfect information and the immobility of the economic factors of production lead to market failure.

Market failure refers to the situation where the free market fails to achieve an outcome that maximizes society’s welfare, of which imperfect information and the immobility of the factors of production, which refers to the inability of resources to move perfectly from one market to another in response to changing market conditions, would lead to market failure as well. In my essay, I explain how the above two factors cause market failure.

Imperfect information is the situation where people engage in economic transactions without having perfect information of what they are buying, due to a discrepancy between the perceived benefit or cost and the actual benefit or cost. Due to the lack of perfect information, consumers end up buying something that is not what they really want or need. This is because consumers are often swayed by persuasive advertising and sales staff pushing products based on commission. As a lot of time and effort is required for one to acquire all the necessary information as they lacked the time and expertise to learn about the many products in the market, this principal-agent problem is likely to persist. Hence, when a consumer buys a good that is not what they really want or is less suitable, his welfare is below the socially optimum level and this gives rise to market failure. 

Imperfect information also contributes to market failure that arises from negative externalities and the presence of demerit goods. This is because adverse effects are imposed on third parties when these goods are produced or consumed. Externalities are defined as third party spillover effects, where third parties are affected when goods are produced or consumed, and demerit goods are goods which the government deems undesirable in the light of consumers lack of information or due to the negative externalities imposed on third parties.

In this case of demerit goods, individuals are unaware of the social cost incurred during their consumption of the good. Both negative externalities of production as seen in the figures below. Without government intervention, MPB = MPC and output is at Qp. The social equilibrium Qs is at MSB = MSC. Since MSC > MSB, a deadweight loss is generated. Since Qp > Qs, the good is over-produced. 

[Insert diagrams on negative externalities from production and consumption]

As for demerit goods, when MPB = MPC, the output is at Qp. However, the social outcome Qs is where MSB = MSC. Between Qp and Qs there is a loss of potential welfare (deadweight loss). Since Qp > Qs, the good is said to be over-consumed. 

As for factor immobility, there are two major types – occupational and geographical immobility. Occupational immobility of labour arises because workers lack the required education or skills to take on new jobs in another industry. For instance, people working in fields with low technology will find it hard to work in Silicon Valley due to their lack of knowledge, thus making them occupationally immobile. On the other hand, geographical labour immobility exists in large countries when there are barriers to people moving from one region to another in search of jobs. This barriers include family and social ties and cost involved in moving to another area to settle down. Large countries like the USA and the UK will face these sorts of geographical immobility problems and issues. 

Market failure arises as resources are unemployed due to factor immobility and hence the economy is producing inside its PPC. Hence, the outcome is productive inefficient and also allocatively inefficient.

[Insert a diagram on production possibilities curve]

The diagram shows that there are unexploited resources untapped, and therefore there is productive inefficiency. Also, there could be market failure due to allocative inefficiency. This is because resources are unable to flow from contracting to expanding markets. Hence, society’s welfare is not fully maximized and it can be argued that market failure results. 

In conclusion, imperfect information is often present in market dominant firms such as oligopolistic and monopolistic firms as they are price setters with large market power, often arising from possession of asymmetric information. Imperfect information prevents consumers from knowing all the prices and the product production processes also. Therefore, it is difficult to remove the presence of imperfect information as it is so prevalent. Factor immobility is also another common cause of market and it is difficult to be eradicated. Hence, market failure would tend to persist.

JC Economics Essay - H1, H2, H3 economics essays - tutor's comments: There are a lot of small problems with this economics paper that can be easily remedied, and therefore the question is: what are the areas that need to be worked on for this essay? Having said that, there are many salient strengths to this economics essay answer as well: think, what are the strengths and good points of the material presented in this economics essay? While fairly strong in economic theory, and covering most of the relevant ground to address the question posed, and having lots of interesting angles and possible areas of discussion, this economics essay answer could have more relevant examples and be more vivid, clearer, and better by giving specific real world examples for each model, theory, or economics concept mentioned. This economics essay could have pushed the envelope, but did not go too far nor did not stretch the point to emphasise, highlight, showcase certain good economics material, which would have vastly improved it. What other areas of improvement do you see and notice, and how would you have approached this essay question? Think about how to improve on this economics essay - how you can value add to this suggested, possible answer. Special thanks to A G and S S for their contribution. 

Explain, with relevant examples, the economic circumstances when prices do not accurately or correctly reflect actual benefits and costs, and explain how free markets fail as a result. [10]

The general theme of this economics essay is on market failure. The circumstances when prices do not correctly reflect costs and benefits include the presence of externalities, both positive and negative, merit and demerit goods, as well as imperfect pricing information. Therefore, this essay aims to explain how the above mentioned circumstances will lead to market failure.

What are externalities? Externalities refer to the spillover effects on third parties arising from the production or consumption of a good. They can then be sub-divided into positive externalities, referring to benefits imposed on third parties, and negative externalities, referring to adverse effects imposed on third parties.

Prices are usually set at the intersection point of the market demand and supply curves. However, in the case of positive externalities, prices do not reflect the actual costs and benefits since the market demand and supply curves fail to take into account the marginal external benefits brought about by the consumption and production of the good.

[Insert diagrams on positive externalities from consumption and production]

Marginal external benefits (MEB) is defined as the additional benefit enjoyed by third parties from the production or consumption of a good. For positive externalities in consumption, assuming no externalities on the production side, positive externalities results in MSB exceeding MPB by the amount equal to MEB. Without government intervention, the private equilibrium is at Qp, where MPB = MPC. However, the socially optimum equilibrium is at Qs where MSB = MSC. Since Qp < Qs, the good is under-consumed, resulting in allocative inefficiency and hence the market fails. An example would be the consumption of vaccination, where the risk of disease is reduced for both the vaccinated person and third parties he comes into contact with.

Similarly, for positive externalities in production, assuming no externalities on the consumption side, there is a divergence between MPC and MSC due to MEB. The private equilibrium is at Qp where MPC = MPB, while the socially optimal equilibrium is at Qs, where MSC = MSB. Since Qp < Qs, the good is under-produced, resulting in allocative inefficiency and hence market failure. An example would be the production of honey which bees would pollinate the nearby fruit orchards.

In the case of negative externalities, prices do not reflect the actual costs and benefits as the market demand and supply curves do not take into account the marginal external costs bought by the consumption or production of the good.

[Insert diagrams on negative externalities from consumption and production]

Marginal external costs (MEC) id defined as the additional costs imposed on third parties from the production or consumption of a good. For negative externalities from consumption, assuming no externalities on the production side, there exist a divergence between MSB and MPB due to MEC. This results in the over-consumption of the good as seen from how the private outcome Qp exceeds the socially optimal outcome of Qs. The outcome is allocative inefficient and thus the market fails. An example would be smoking, where third parties incur costs such as the inhalation and breathing in of second hand smoke.

For negative externalities from production, assuming no externalities from consumption, there exist a divergence between MPC and MSC due to MEC. This results in the over-production of the good, seen from how Qp exceeds Qs, resulting in allocative inefficiency and hence the failure of the market. An example would be the disposal of industrial waste into rivers, causing water pollution which poisons the catches of fishermen whom are third parties.

Next, prices also do not reflect the actual costs and benefits in the case of merit and demerit goods. Merit goods refer to goods in which the state believes will be under-consumed if left to the free market because some individuals are unable to factor in the full private benefits of consumption. 

[Insert diagram on merit good]

For merit good, between Qp and Qs, MSB > MSC, thus the triangle pointing towards Qs represents the area of deadweight loss arising from allocative inefficiency, since the good is under-consumed. Hence the price will not be accurate in reflecting the benefits instead it is at MPB. An example would be the consumption of education where a person may leave school early because he is too young to understand education can improve his future. 

On the other hand, demerit goods are goods which the government believes will be over-consumed if left to the free market because some individuals are unable to factor in the full private costs of consumption.

[Insert diagram on demerit good]

For demerit good, between Qs and Qp, MSC > MSB and Qp > Qs, thus the triangle pointing towards Qs represents the area of deadweight loss arising from the over-consumption of the good, resulting in allocative inefficiency and thus market failure. Hence the price of the good will not be accurate in reflecting the costs since the demand of the good is at MPB, while it should have been at MSB. Examples of demerit goods include alcohol, where excessive consumption results in serious health and financial problems.

Lastly, where there is information asymmetry with regards to pricing, prices will not reflect the actual costs of production as sellers will be able to charge prices that are higher than marginal costs. This is due to the fact that buyers find difficulty acquiring pricing information from different sellers, thus gives seller pricing power and enable them to charge prices that are higher than marginal costs. Therefore, deadweight loss is generated and market failure occurs.

In conclusion, there are various instances where prices do not reflect the actual costs and benefits and in most of the cases, the resulting market failure arises due to the presence of allocative inefficiency.

JC Economics Essays - H1, H2, H3 economics essays - tutor's comments: This economics essay paper is very well done, by directly addressing the question requirements, and providing clear, simple to understand, direct examples that target the requirements of the economics exam question. Always remember to answer your economics exam question as it stands, and not as you imagine it to be. The student also has a very sound understanding of economic theory, and knows how to properly structure the memorised economics material and essay answer to make this paper a model essay. This model paper was done under timed conditions, which makes it even more remarkable. Thanks to S for editing work done, and thanks to A G and S H for their kind and invaluable contributions. Usual question applies - how can you apply this to your essay writing, and how could you write a better economics paper? Always seek to improve and better your standards. 

Should governments always intervene when free markets fail to allocate resources efficiently? [15]

It should be recognized that free markets often fail due to allocative inefficiency, and there are various ways where governments can intervene to improve the outcome of resource allocation. However, governments should not always intervene as there are instances where intervention results in a less desirable outcome. This essay thus aims to analyse the pros and cons of the various ways of government intervention, and instances of government failure.

Yes, governments should intervene to improve the efficiency of free markets. Firstly, government policies to bring down the output level to the socially optimal output level can be divided into two categories, one market-based and another of direct control. A per unit output tax of the good raises production cost, thus reducing the output to the socially optimal outcome when there are negative externalities or demerit goods.

[Insert diagram for tax]

By imposing a per unit tax equivalent to MEC, MPC shifts to the left, thus bringing the output level down to Qs, coinciding with socially optimal output level. Hence, there should be intervention as it allows allocative efficiency to be achieved. 

On the flipside, an output subsidy would lower production costs, thus raising production to an output level coincidental to the socially optimal outcome, bettering the situation where there are positive externalities or merit goods.

[Insert diagram for subsidy]

By giving an output subsidy equivalent to MEB, MPC is shifted to the right, thus bringing the output level forward to Qs, the socially optimal level. Thus, allocative efficiency is similarly achieved.

While controlling output directly is a faster and more straightforward method, some may argue for the use of emission charges in the case of negative externalities as it advocates specific actions to cut down on the externalities which seem to some as a more long term solution. For example, in the case of pollution, emission charges induce firms to directly reduce pollution by the addition of a filter or the switch to less polluting production methods. However, there are limitations to such a policy as it gives high administrative costs due to the difficulty faced in monitoring emissions as compared to output.

When market-based policies fail to work, it may be sensible for the government to intervene with direct controls. An output ban could be used to forcefully bring down the output level to the socially optimal one. 

[Insert diagram on total ban]

An output ban will be advisable in the case where MEC is so large that the socially optimal output occurs at Qs = 0. In this case, a ban will be allocatively efficient. However, it should be noted that in a case where the MEC is relatively small, government intervention is not advisable as the outcome is even more allocative inefficient. As seen in the diagram above, when the government does not intervene, the area of welfare loss is smaller than when the government chooses to impose a total ban where quantity will be brought to zero. Hence, output bans are very extreme and thus governments should only intervene with a ban if MEC is large.

Another form of direct control would be direct free provision by the government to bring the output level to one that is socially optimal.

[Insert diagram on free provision]

For free provision, the MEB is so large that the socially optimal outcome occurs at Qs. Thus output has to be subsidized to such a large extent that the price of the good effectively becomes zero.

However, just like an output ban, free provision is very extreme and should only be used when the extent of MEB is very large. 

Where MEB is relatively small, MPC needs to be shifted to the right in order for socially optimal outcome to be achieved. Therefore, if the good was to be provided for free, the good will be over-consumed, resulting in a deadweight loss, implying that the outcome is worse than before intervention. Hence government should not intervene. 

In conclusion, despite substantial pros brought about by government intervention, the government should not always intervene as there will bound to be cases of government failure when the extent of intervention required is wrongly judged as seen from the examples above. Furthermore, the extent of administrative costs of some of the methods of intervention outweighs their benefits, translating to the view that the government should not always intervene.

JC Economics Essays - H1, H2, H3 Economics Essays - tutor's comments: While there is a lot of good economics material in this generally well written essay, the main problem is that it could have addressed the examination question more directly and targeted the answer better to the economics question specifically. Having said that, there are some saving graces to this economics essay. There is great use of varied economics diagrams, a lot of explanation, solid economic reasoning, and generally good application of economic principles and ideas, concepts, and logic. These save the essay quite a lot. However, better use of essay technique and more direct answering of the question would be great and would raise the grade achieved - also, lots of economics examples should also have been used. What other ways could be used to improve this essay? Think of how you could make this economics paper even better than it already is. 

(b) “The government should produce all public goods and all merit goods”. Is this statement accurate from an economist’s point of view? (15)

(b) “The government should produce all public goods and all merit goods”. Is this statement accurate from an economist’s point of view? [15]

Note: please read the economics tutor's comments at the back after reading this economics essay. 

The efficient allocation of resources is the use of a country’s limited resources in such a manner that maximises the total welfare of the people. A pure market economy will not be able to do this for three main reasons: the emergence of imperfect market structures, externalities and the lack of public goods. Therefore, government intervention is needed to deal with these market failures. In this paper, we shall look at the main features of the market economy, and then look at its limitations.

Firstly, in a market economy, there is private ownership of resources and finished goods. Individuals and firms can thus transfer ownership to any other party that they wish. Secondly, the allocation of resources is determined by a unique system known as the price mechanism of the market. The forces of demand representing consumers and the forces of supply that represent producers interact to determine the price of goods – thus leading to “the invisible hand” allocating resources to the best possible uses. The price mechanism is the channel by which consumers signal to producers of the goods they want and the respective quantity that they want.

The market mechanism is also very efficient because decision making is completely decentralised. Producers respond at the local market level immediately to consumer preferences. As freedom of choice and profit motive is allowed, producers will use scarce resources as efficiently to produce. Intense competition also forces producers to produce at the lowest cost and thus forces producers to produce at the lowest cost and thus forces them to innovate and invent new products in order to satisfy the wants of consumers. In the long run, it is the consumer who benefits in the form of new, better and cheaper products.

However, the market economy is not without its drawbacks and the most serious one is its inability to deal with externalities. Externalities are benefits (positive externality) and costs (negative externality) that fall on society due to economic activities which the price mechanism is unable to account for.

In the case of public goods, no producers would want to produce goods like street lighting or radio broadcasts because these are non-exclusive between payers and non-payers. And they are also inexhaustible. Thus, in a market economy, they would not be produced although the consumers would generally benefit from these goods. Thus, to maximise welfare, government should supply the good at zero market price. The government may either produce these goods itself or contract the production of these goods to the private sector. The government would hence, finance the production of these goods from tax revenue.

Even in the case of market goods, the market will not produce a quantity at the socially optimum level- private companies would only produce education for those who can pay although it is to society’s benefit in the long run to provide all children with education Thus, the government would intervene in the case of merit goods by providing subsidies.

Subsidies are transfers from the government to individuals and firms. In the case of merit goods, a subsidy can be provided directly to producers or consumers. Legislation, which is enacting laws and regulations to ensure optimum consumption of a good, can also, be implemented by the government. Thus, the fear of being penalised increases the demand for the goods, leading to greater consumption. The government may also provide the shortfall of merit goods or may contract private firms to supply the shortfall. The government can also educate the public through mass media and carry out campaigns to teach the citizens the importance of consuming the merit good. Thus, in the case of merit goods, the government would have to intervene as it has large revenue from taxes that is able to finance the provision of merit goods unlike private enterprises which do not have such a large capital base.

In the case of a negative externality, private consumers and businesses would generate the social costs of pollution, congestion and environment degradation in the process of seeking their own interest. As the market fails to place a market value on these costs, they get away with paying for them. Thus, the government also has to intervene in this case due to the negative externality generated that affects the third party. Thus, the government would have to impose taxes such that producers would be motivated to produce using greener technologies in order to reduce their probability of them having to pay taxes that add on t their production costs. The government may also introduce legislation in order to reduce emissions and negative externalities in production.

Figure 1: Marginal Social Costs, Benefits and Marginal Private Benefits, costs

Indeed for the efficient allocation of resources, form all points of view, production of any good should be where the MSC=MSB. As show in Figure 1, output 0Q0, is the ideal level of production from society’s point of view. However, the market will only consider MPC which is only part of MSC. Marginal Private Benefit is only part of MSB. Therefore, goods are either under produced or overproduced. Hence, government intervention is required to correct these market imperfections in order to achieve the socially optimum level of output.

The market mechanism may also undermine consumer’s welfare. As producers are profit motivated-they only produce for the rich-people who can afford to pay. Thus, food, housing, medical services and even ordinary goods will not be adequately produced and provided for the poor.

Another disadvantage is the market economy does not guarantee against the concentration of economic power in the hands of a few. This is called a monopoly or an oligopoly. One company would then be able to exploit consumers.

Finally, the market economy, as seen in history, causes a wide gap or disparity between groups of people in the country. Massive wealth is held by a few and this small group gets richer because one needs wealth to generate more wealth. Thus, the market economy may fail to maximise society’s welfare.

For the above reasons, it is best that some form of government supervision of economic activities may be present. A good example of this is Singapore. This country has prospered due to the spirit of free enterprise-private ownership and profit. However, the government has set up a number of authorities to ensure that resources are efficiently allocated while market forces prevail. The Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) looks into the use of limited land space. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) supervises private and public transportation. The Port of Singapore Authority (PSA) looks into ports and shipping. In this way, Singapore benefits from the market system: without its bad effects.

JC ECONOMICS ESSAYS - Economics Tutor's Note: This is a very interesting approach. I think this Economics essay is interesting, well thought-out and reflective. In fact, it is rather good. However, it is not the standard way to deal with "A" level exam questions. In terms of an A level answer, this would not be the proper way to answer the economics question. The standard view should be something like:

Essay Introduction - Define public goods and merit goods, perhaps arguing that merit goods are underconsumed and underproduced because of either imperfect information or the presence of positive externalities. Introduce the main arguments. 

Essay Thesis - Yes, on the one hand, the government should produce public goods and merit goods (Diagram +egs + why)

Essay Anti-thesis - No, on the other hand, the government shouldn’t produce public goods and merit goods (Diagram + egs + why)

It can legislate, it can use free market, it can use the Coase theorem (perhaps tradeable permits or other methods), it can subsidise private producers. (Include limitations of the government also; government failure - thus it shouldn't, since it could be even worse.)

Essay Synthesis, for an evaluative conclusion that weighs the arguments and their merits - Govt produces public goods, govt taxes/subsidises. Demerit/merit goods should not be directly provided. Clever, pithy, evaluative opinion-based statement justified with Economics reasoning, concepts, and theories at the end.

Having said that, think of how you could approach this essay question and think about the answers that you would give. This student answered the question in a divergent way, but there are lots that we can learn from it. Perhaps, this economics essay could be even better if the student had focused on answering the question directly or in a more clear or obvious manner. Thanks for reading and cheers.