The price mechanism will always allocate scarce resources efficiently for all goods and services in a market economy. Assess the validity of this statement made by an economist. [15]

This economics paper assesses whether the price mechanism will always allocate scarce resources efficiently for all goods and services in a market economy. 

On the one hand, it will indeed allocate scarce resources efficiently in economic theory, because of the workings of the price mechanism to achieve productive and allocative efficiency. On the other hand, the allocation of scarce resources may not always be efficient, especially when there are market failures, which distort the workings of the free market.

On the one hand, the price mechanism allocates scarce resources efficiently in the market economy for goods and services through its signalling, rationing, allocating, and incentive functions. The signaling function is one where the price of a good allows for a re-calibration of the quantity demanded and quantity supplied, allowing goods to be efficiently allocated. Under the market price, consumers seek to maximise utility, and will therefore only consume if they are able to have a positive net benefit from the consumption of these goods. Those who are willing and able to pay will obtain the good. Correspondingly, the resources used to produce these goods will also be efficiently allocated, as producers maximise their profits by producing only if the cost of production is less than or equal to the prevailing market price. As a result, there is productive efficiency, since goods will be produced at the lowest cost combination to ensure profits are maximised. On the whole, there is also allocative efficiency, since society’s welfare is maximised, where only those who are able to consume and produce do so. 

Question: What economics diagram do you think should be drawn here? How would this diagram back up your arguments? 

On the other hand, there are market failures in the real world, which may impede the efficient allocation of scarce resources in a theoretical free market. Market failure is the situation where the free market fails to allocate resources effectively, and there is allocative inefficiency. There are many types of market failure, such as the lack of provision of public goods, under-consumption of merit goods but the over-consumption of demerit goods, externalities both positive and negative and also in consumption and production, imperfect competition, imperfect information, factor immobility, and inequality. 

Here, we focus on the under-consumption of merit goods. Because rational consumers seek to maximise their own welfare, they do not account for the positive externalities associated with the consumption of the merit good. Externalities are defined as the spillover effects to third parties who are not involved in the production or consumption of the good. Vaccinations provided for example by the National Health Service (NHS) are examples of merit goods. However, an individual consumer only considers his private benefit from getting vaccinated, and does not consider the positive externalities his vaccination confers on society. This results in an under-consumption of the merit good of vaccination, and there is therefore dead-weight loss, as society’s welfare has yet to be maximized due to this under-consumption.

Question: What economics diagram do you think should be drawn here to support the merit good argument, which shows that markets do not always work efficiently?

In conclusion, while the price mechanism allocates scarce resources efficiently in theory, this may not be the case in reality, as there are market failures that challenge the assumptions upon which the efficiency of the price mechanism is predicated. In the real world, with market failures, there is the need for government intervention in the free market to reduce or eliminate market failures so that the free market can produce the optimal outcomes the economists promise. 

Economics Tutor's Comment - This is a rather strong economics essay which covers quite a few important points and arguments, but it could do so much more. The candidate's use of economic theory is quite strong in this economics essay. Could more examples have been used, or could the example of the NHS have been even better utilised to make the point? Perhaps another market failure - the lack of provision of national defence - would have also been brought in to buttress the arguments. What else would make this economics essay even better than it is currently? Thank you for reading and cheers!  

JC Economics Essays - This economics essays site helps economics students with the A-Levels Economics (Cambridge, A1/S, A2, H1/H2 levels), and the international AS level economics examinations. This blog provides a range of useful economics content, materials, tips and techniques, and model economics essays that students in the United Kingdom, and also in countries such as Malaysia and Singapore, can use to excel in their studies and examinations.

This model essay was contributed by WT, our resident expert who helps students understand the beauty of Economics and provides content on economic issues. WT has a wide-ranging interest in Econometrics, Economic History, International Trade, and Game Theory, especially applications to real life. And as always, S. S., the editor of JC Economics Essays, edited this economics essay. He also provided comments for this essay. 

Consumers and producers are generally assumed to be motivated by self-interest. Explain how the pursuit of self-interest can help to address the central economic problem of limited resources and unlimited wants. [10]

Adapted from an actual economics essay examination

This economics paper explains that the pursuit of self-interest results in an efficient allocation of resources through the price mechanism, which addresses the problem of scarcity. 

Human wants are unlimited, while earth's resources of land, labour, capital, and entrepreneurship are limited. This results in scarcity. What is scarcity? It refers to the situation where resources that are limited are not able to meet the requirement of unlimited wants. However, there is a solution to meeting these two different imperatives - and that is the free market, with its price mechanism, which as Adam Smith said, acts like "an invisible hand". 

The price mechanism means that it is the intersection of demand and supply that determines the price and the quantity eventually produced. It is the rational choice of millions of suppliers, producers, and firms meeting the requirements of millions of consumers, individuals, and households. Demand is defined as the willingness and ability to purchase a good or service, ceteris paribus, while supply is defined as the willingness and ability to produce a good or service, also ceteris paribus. 

The price mechanism addresses the central problem of economics, coordinating resources to their best uses, and solving the problem of what to produce, how to produce, and for whom to produce, because it serves the important four functions of signaling, rationing, allocating, and incentivising. The signaling function is one where the price of a good allows for a re-calibration of the quantity demanded and quantity supplied. As the price of a good increases, indicating a more pronounced situation of scarcity, the quantity demanded of a good falls, while the quantity supplied rises, ceteris paribus. The converse is also true, where the fall in the price of a good, which indicates an amelioration of scarcity, results in an increase in the quantity demanded and a fall in the quantity supplied.

Given the prevailing market prices, buyers who seek to maximise their utility will demand the good. Under this demand function, those are willing and able to pay for the good are able to obtain it, while those who are not willing or able to pay will go without the good. Meanwhile, producers who are willing and able to produce the good at a cost below or equivalent to the prevailing market price will produce it, as they are incentivised to maximise profits, while those who produce at a cost above the market price will not. This also determines the allocation of resources that go into producing this good.

In conclusion, the pursuit of self-interest utilises the price mechanism to address the problem of scarcity, achieving an efficient allocation of resources.

Economics Tutor's Comment - This is a very strong effort for the A levels and covers quite a few important points and arguments. The candidate's use of economic theory is quite strong in this economics essay. However, one should not and cannot rest on one's laurels. What would make this economics essay even better? Thank you for reading. Cheers!  

JC Economics Essays - This economics essays site helps students with the A-Levels (Cambridge, A1/S, A2, H1/H2 levels), and the international AS level economics examinations. This blog provides a range of useful economics content, materials, tips and techniques, and model economics essays that students in the United Kingdom, and all around the world, can use to excel in their studies and examinations.

This model essay with sample comments was contributed by WT, our resident Economics expert who helps students understand the beauty of Economics and its applications in real life. WT has a strong interest in Econometrics, Economic History, International Trade, and Game Theory, especially applications to real life. This economics post was edited by S. S., the editor of JC Economics Essays.

What is the central problem of economics?

In this short and sweet post, we explain in simple and clear terms - What is the Central Problem of Economics?

Human wants are unlimited.

However, resources that can be used to produce goods and services to meet these unlimited human wants are limited. 

These limited or finite resources which are used to produce goods and services are called the factors of production. 

There are four main factors of production – they are land, labour, capital, and entrepreneurship (or enterprise). 

Land refers to all gifts of nature, such as land, natural resources, and water. 

Labour refers to human intellect, effort, hours, and expertise. Human capital refers to skilled labour. 

Capital refers to goods that can be used to produce other goods. 

Entrepreneurship refers to risk-taking behaviour to coordinate the factors of production of land, labour, and capital, to bring an increase in output from given inputs.  

The situation of unlimited human wants against the realities of limited resources is the central problem of economics. 

This central problem of economics is the problem of scarcity, where the factors of production are limited but human wants are unlimited. 

Scarcity necessitates rational choice among competing uses for the resources, which means that a rational choice has to be made about what to produce, how to produce, and for whom to produce. 

Choosing one option over another, or choosing one use of a scarce resource against another competing use for the same resource, leads to the concept of opportunity cost. 

Opportunity cost is defined as the cost of the next best alternative forgone. 

To address the problem of scarcity, there have been many mechanisms developed or evolved over the years to solve this allocation problem. 

One example is the command economy, where a central planner will decide what to produce, how to produce, and for whom to produce, and the central planner will allocate the factors of production to the areas of production deemed necessary, and then allocate the goods and services to the population according to certain principles (for example, socialist or communist principles). 

Another example is the free market economy, or capitalistic economy, where the price mechanism in the free market will allocate resources to competing uses. 

Assuming the conditions of perfect competition and perfect information, the unfettered free market allocates scarce resources efficiently to their best uses. 

According to Adam Smith, the father of economics, the free market operates like an “invisible hand”, coordinating the factors of production and goods and services. 

However, most economies in the world are actually mixed economies. 

Mixed economies refer to economies that are partly centrally run, and partly free market, or economies that generally utilise the price mechanism subject to some government intervention, to varying degrees.  

The study of economics generally assumes that the price mechanism is the most efficient way of allocating resources, given certain assumptions, and also allows for a certain degree of government intervention, especially to cure market failures, situations where the free market does not allocate resources most efficiently. 

Source: An abridged and adapted chapter from the powerful and simple concise economics guide - Success in Microeconomics (https://payhip.com/b/Az5w)  For more information, do get a copy of the e-book. Do support this economics guide, please. Thank you very much!

JC Economics Essays - This useful and relevant economics essay site has economics resources, such as economics essays at the A level standard (H1, H2, H3, and A levels), as well as undergraduate and masters economics essays, and secrets to scoring well in economics examinations and writing strong essay papers. Thank you for reading, and cheers.  

Explain with real world examples why markets might fail in the case of public goods and where information is imperfect. [10]

This paper explains, using real world examples, the market failures caused by public goods and imperfect information. Market failure refers to the situation where the free market fails to achieve the socially optimal outcome that maximises society’s welfare, and therefore fails to allocate resources efficiently. The market is said to be allocative inefficient. There are several sources of market failure, which include positive and negative externalities; the underconsumption of merit goods but overconsumption of demerit goods; the lack of production of public goods if they are left to the free market; market dominance, such as the existence of monopolies and oligopolies; the presence of imperfect and asymmetric information; and the immobility of the factors of production. Public goods and imperfect information would be the focus of this essay.

A public good refers to a good which is non-excludable and non-rival. Some common and popular examples of public goods include national defence and street lighting. "Non-excludable" means that it is impossible or impractical to prevent a person who has not paid from consuming the good. This implies that consumers would be unwilling to pay, as they are able to enjoy the benefits without paying, thus giving rise to “free riders”, resulting in firms lacking an incentive to produce the good and therefore a missing market. 

"Non-rival" means that the consumption of the good by a person does not diminish the quantity or quality of the good available to others. "Non-rival" implies that, once the good is produced, the Marginal Cost (MC) of allowing an additional person to consume the good is zero. Therefore, if the allocative efficient level of consumption is where Price (P) = MC, and MC = 0, then P = MC = 0 suggests that the good should be optimally provided for free, necessitating government provision. 

Hence, public goods are a form of market failure and government provision is required. Governments have the willingness and ability to produce public goods due to their non-profit nature, and unlike private firms, are able to raise compulsory taxes which citizens are compelled to pay, for the production of the public good. 

On the other hand, imperfect information refers to the situation where an agent lacks all relevant information with which to make a rational decision. 

Negative externalities refer to the adverse effects imposed on third parties arising from the production or consumption of a good. A demerit good is an undesirable good which the state believes will be over-consumed and over-produced if left to the workings of the free market. In the case of negative externalities and demerit goods, some consumers may be unaware or may underestimate the harm done to themselves and to others when certain goods are consumed or produced, and thus do not take into account the costs for themselves and on larger society. In other words, due to imperfect information, some individuals may be unable to factor in the full private costs of consumption – perceived Marginal Private Cost (MPC) is less than the actual MPC. This is shown in the above diagram, where the actual MPC, which is also the Marginal Social Cost (MSC), lies above the perceived MPC. The private outcome is Qp where perceived MPC = Marginal Private Benefit (MPB), whereas the social outcome is Qs where Marginal Social Benefit (MSB) = MSC. Between Qs and Qp, because MSC > MSB, the shaded area representing the negative welfare, the deadweight loss, can be eliminated if output were reduced from Qp to Qs. Since Qp > Qs, the good is overconsumed. Cigarettes are an example of a demerit good with negative externalities in consumption. Due to a possible lack of knowledge of the adverse effects arising from the consumption of cigarettes, smokers place themselves and nearby passive smokers at risk from suffering future health problems. 

THINK: What economics diagram should be drawn here, and what should the diagram show?

Positive externalities refer to the benefits enjoyed by third parties arising from the production or consumption of a good. A merit good is a desirable good which the state believes would be under-consumed or under-produced if left to the workings of the free market. In the case of positive externalities and merit goods, some consumers may be unaware or may underestimate the benefits enjoyed by themselves and to others when certain goods are consumed or produced, and thus do not take into account the benefits for themselves and on larger society. Training of workers are an example of a merit good with positive externalities in production as it generates a positive benefit for other firms when these workers work there. However, due to imperfect information, companies may be unwilling to send their own workers for upgrading, thus leading to the good being under-produced and therefore market failure.

In conclusion, the free market may experience market failure due to other sources besides public goods and imperfect information. Hence, the government could decide to intervene to establish allocative efficiency as part of their micro-economic goals.

JC Economics Essays - This A level economics essay response was contributed by Wilson YWS, and is one of the best essays that he has written. The response is clear, simple to understand, and shows that the student understands what the economics question demands. 

However, the major issue with it is that the real world examples could be better used to bring out and illustrate the various elements of the theories. 

Looking closely at this essay, how could the real world examples be better used to show that there really is market failure? Merely stating the examples or bringing them out piece-meal would not be a very constructive approach. However, overall, this essay is still a strong piece of work on balance but one that could be even better if it were improved. 

Thank you very much for reading, and cheers. 

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. 

Globalisation and international trade have opened up new opportunities in the world. While a globalised international, world economy brings great benefits to the US economy by opening up new markets for American exports, it has subjected American companies and their workers to unfair overseas competition, which justifies protectionism for these affected industries. [25]

What is globalisation? Globalisation refers to the increasing integration and interdependence of the world’s economies arising from increased trade and greater international mobility of factors like capital, labour and enterprise. There have been a lot of benefits arising from globalisation. Globalisation has benefited the American economy vastly as it has enabled ordinary Americans to enjoy greater consumption possibilities and the engine of growth of the world's most powerful economy. However, it can be argued in a sense that the opening of new markets has also subjected American firms and workers to unfair foreign anti-competitive practices like dumping of cheap, low cost goods, and loss of jobs in the secondary sector of the American economy. 

Comparative advantage is the main theory for international trade. The law of comparative advantage states that a country is able to enjoy higher consumption levels if it was to specialize goods in which it has comparative advantage in, and trade for other goods in which it has a comparative disadvantage in. 

[Insert diagram on production possibilities of USA and Mexico]

Trade enables the USA to consume at any point along its consumption possibilities curve, which is beyond its own PPC. At the same time, Mexico also benefits from international trade. Therefore, both countries are able to consume more goods and services. Hence, it can be seen that when the opportunity costs of producing different goods differ between 2 countries, specialization and trade according to comparative advantage is beneficial to both countries. As such, increased exports to new markets would enable USA to have higher consumption possibilities as compared to a situation of autarky. 

[Insert diagram on AD and AS increasing]

Increased exports also allow full utilization of resources, which increases both AD and AS. Increased exports to new markets allow USA to overcome their domestic demand constraints by giving them access to larger world markets. With additional demand coming from exports, greater utilization of otherwise unemployed resources, output, income and employment. Since AD = C + I + G + (X – M), AD shifts out and real output increases, but price level remains unchanged. Rising export demand further stimulates investments, causing the AS to shift to the right in the long run, resulting in greater output and a lower price level, hence ensuring long run, sustained economic growth in the economy.

However, on the other hand, the globalized economy has also subjected American companies and workers to unfair foreign anti-competitive practices like dumping, which refers to the situation where foreign imports are sold below cost because foreign firms are trying to drive out domestic firms to gain market power. This is a situation that seems somewhat unfair to developed economies.

Also, labour unions in developed economies continuously argue that imports from developing countries are cheap because they artificially keep costs down by subjecting their workers to ‘sweatshop’ like work environments and by paying them depressed wages.

Thus, to curb this problem of unfair overseas competition, many in the USA lobby for countervailing duties (i.e. import tariffs) to be imposed to raise import prices so that they are more in line with prices of locally produced goods. This is known as protectionism, defined as the act of imposing economic policies aimed at restricting trade between countries, designed primarily to protect domestic producers and workers from foreign competition. Methods of protectionism include import tariffs, import quotas, subsidies, voluntary export restraints (VER), foreign exchange restrictions, physical barriers to entry, and technical barriers to entry.

However, on the other hand, protectionism results in greater allocative inefficiency as domestic firms have less drive to improve operating efficiencies and minimize costs. Also, protectionism results in a ‘beggar thy neighbour’ effect where exports, output and income of its trading partners are reduced, which then curbs exports, output and employment of the former. All these indirectly harm American consumers and the American economy in general. 

On top of the costs of protectionism, there are actually benefits to be reaped from the competition from imports. Firstly, competition from foreign imports forces local producers to innovate, cut costs and improve product quality. Local consumers thus enable enjoy lower prices and higher product quality form both imports and domestically produced goods, thus putting the majority of the Americans at an advantage, whereas protectionism only benefits the producers. Secondly, countries may be unable to produce some goods domestically because of the lack of key resources. Importing such goods will thus widen consumer choice. Product variety is also increased when intra-industry trade occurs as consumers get to enjoy not only domestic versions but also imported version of a given type of good, thus benefiting the majority of the Americans again. 

In conclusion, while one must admit that the globalized economy had brought about great benefits to the US economy by opening up new markets for US exports, the overseas competition faced by the American companies and workers may not be unfair. In view of the cheap labour argument, the fact that in developing countries, labour is in abundant and thus these countries will have a comparative advantage in producing labour intensive goods, which is why imports from these countries are cheaper. Therefore, this renders protectionism unjustified as protecting these industries would be to produce a good that it has a comparative disadvantage in. Therefore, this comprises the consumption levels of the country, and gradually greater allocative inefficiency as domestic firms become even more productively inefficient because they have less need to improve operating efficiencies. Hence, protectionism may not be justified in the USA.

JC Economics Essays - H1, H2, H3 Economics essays - tutor's comments: This economics essay on globalisation, international trade, and the US economy is quite interesting, well written, crafted under timed conditions, and seems to address the economics question posed rather well to a large extent. There are some developed economic theories and the appropriate essay techniques, such as signposting, are used. The answer is rather clear and generally well developed, and could quite possibly gain a rather good mark from the examiners. The question is: how can this economics essay be made better? The overall quality of the essay answer could be much higher, but the question is - how can that be achieved under examination conditions, when time is scarce? What should have been done, and what should have been done better? Also, what other economic theories should have been brought in to make the answer more complete? Think about how you could write this essay better, and sharpen it further, and stretch the grade with models, theories, and examples. Perhaps this economics paper could have used more examples and empirical data to show good Economics knowledge and materials. 

International Trade Essay: Should America utilise protectionist measures to manage the costs of international free trade?

A globalized world economy opening up markets for US exports refers to international trade which is defined as the exchange of goods and services across international boundaries. This brings about good benefits to the US economy such as higher consumption possibilities and reaping economies of scale. However, US companies and workers also face unfair foreign competition in the form of dumping and the cheap labour argument. 

Increased exports have led to the US economy gaining benefits. One such benefit is higher consumption possibilities. It allows USA to specialize and export goods in which it has a comparative advantage in and import goods in which it has a comparative disadvantage in, whereby comparative advantage refers to the situation where a country has a lower opportunity cost of producing a good as compared to another country. USA is then able to increase the overall consumption of all goods and services as compared to an autarky situation which refers to a situation of no trade but self-sufficiency instead. Hence, increased exports allow USA to enjoy higher consumption possibilities. 

Moreover, economies of scale can be reaped. With greater export demand, US firms are able to expand their capacity, enabling them to reap economies of scale which causes long run average cost to fall in the long run. As firms pass on some of these cost savings to consumers, material living standards increase as consumers get to consumer more goods at lower prices. Lower prices for domestic consumers and higher profits for domestic producers benefits the US economy.

On the other hand, American companies and workforce face unfair foreign anti-competitive practices like dumping, which refers to the situation where foreign imports are sold below cost because foreign firms are trying to drive out domestic firms to gain market power. In such situations, protectionism in the form of import tariffs is justified to be imposed in order to raise import prices so that they are more in line with prices of locally produced goods. However, lower prices could be due to lower demand or lower distribution costs, which indicates that claims of dumping are most of the time merely a disguise to elicit protection for inefficient domestic producer.

In the cheap labour argument, labour unions in developed economies such as America, commonly argue that imports from developing countries are cheap because they artificially keep costs down by exploiting their workers and hence lobby for restrictions against the imports from these developing countries. The fact that being labour abundant, developing countries have a comparative advantage in producing labour intensive goods, resulting in them having cheaper imports, is ignored. In this case, it is not justifiable for America to impose protectionism in the affected industries. 

Conversely, there are costs of increased exports and not simply just benefits. Terms of trade is defined as the ratio of export prices to import prices. With increased exports, the decrease in export prices relative to import prices would result in the revenue earned from each unit of exports to decrease, causing USA to be able to buy fewer imports than before. In addition, if USA’s inflation is lower than its trading partners, its exports become relatively cheaper than its imports especially with an increase in exports, worsening USA’s terms of trade.

Trade also brings about benefits of competition from imports which is in the case of healthy competition and not an unfair one. Competition from foreign imports forces US producers to innovate and cut costs and improve product quality. Local US consumers thus enjoy lower prices and higher product quality from both imports and domestically produced goods. Besides enabling these US companies to be more productively efficient, market power is also kept in check, reducing the extent of monopoly power in economy and ensures that domestic products which are US exports are comparable to foreign imports. Allocative efficiency is increased as well. 

Protectionism refers to the act of imposing economic policies aimed at restricting trade between countries, designed primarily to protect the domestic producers and workers from foreign competition. While imposing protection in the affected US industries might seem ideal, there are costs involved.

Firstly, USA would suffer from lower consumption possibilities. This is due to the fact that protectionism inhibits specialization according to comparative advantage. Protecting domestic firms against imports causes America to produce more of a good in which it has a comparative disadvantage in. 

[Insert diagram on impact of protectionism on consumption possibilities]

With protectionism of its domestic sector from imports, USA would produce some Good X and specialize only partially than completely in Good Y. The consumption possibilities curve thus shift down. USA then consumes at a point that is worse than the free trade outcome. Hence, protectionism limits the extent of specialization, reducing the gains from specialization and trade according to comparative advantage. 

Secondly, protectionism leads to greater allocative inefficiency as it raises the market power of US firms. They also become productively inefficient as the incentive to minimize costs is generally reduced with the monopoly profits. 

Thirdly, engaging in protectionism by America companies creates a ‘beggar thy neighbour’ effect and retaliation from trading partners. Falling import expenditure reduces the export earnings of USA’s trading partners which consequently suffer from reduced output and income, curbing the exports, output and employment of America companies. These trading partners may retaliate and impose their own import restrictions, causing USA’s exports, output and employment to suffer subsequently.

Lastly, it is politically difficult to remove protectionism once it is given. Vested interests are created and the beneficiaries, which in this case, are USA’s affected industries, would inevitably lobby against removal of protectionism. In the long run, there would be over-allocation of resources to declining sectors at the expense of expanding sectors. 

In conclusion, protectionism for the affected American industries is justifiable only in the short run to manage the cost of free trade. However, it is not justified in the long run as more consequences would have to be dealt with, suggesting that supply-side policies might be a better option in dealing with the problem instead.

JC Economics Essays (on globalisation, protectionism, international trade, and the US Economy): Economics tutor's comments - While this economics essay is generally well written, wide ranging, and covers a lot of good, solid, theoretical economic concepts and ideas, it could be further developed by use of relevant real world examples that are specific and targeted to the requirements of the question. Remember that relevant, real world, realistic, and specific examples can get students a higher grade in writing economics essays. Examiners and tutors love it when students can apply broad theories to specific contexts, with real world examples. What can you learn of the art writing from this economics paper? (Also, what can you learn about what not to write in an economics paper from this essay, in a similar vein? Think about this "counterfactual question".) How could you have tackled the question differently, or what approaches could have been taken to address this question? What other economics diagrams, concepts, or theoretical economics models could have been used, and what else could have been to develop this response further? Reflection and the reading of many different economics answers should build up a mental model which would be useful in answering economics essay questions.Thanks for reading, and cheers. Special thanks to NT for her kind and interesting contribution. 

Discuss, using examples from the United Kingdom, whether high levels of research and innovation are best achieved in competitive compared to monopolistic markets. (25 marks)

This Economics paper argues that high levels of research and innovation are best achieved in monopolistic markets, compared to competitive markets, because dynamic efficiency is best achieved when companies have the willingness and ability to conduct costly research and development (R & D).

First, what is dynamic efficiency? Dynamic efficiency means that companies can invest in education, research, innovation, and other creative processes that help them increase their efficiency over time, and in the long run will help them earn supernormal profits above opportunity costs and explicit costs. Competitive markets are markets with low barriers to entry, and can be idealised using the model of perfect competition.

What is perfect competition? Perfect competition is the market structure where there are many buyers and sellers of a single homogeneous product with perfect substitutes, low barriers to entry, suggesting that they earn normal profits in the long run, and where there is perfect information.

This is in contrast with monopoly, which in theory is a firm that sells a product with few close substitutes, with high barriers to entry, and which thus earns supernormal profits in the long run.

It can be argued that competition might not lead to research and development. Taking perfect competition to benchmark competitive firms in the UK, because they earn normal profits in the long run, they have neither the incentive nor the willingness to invest in research and innovation. For instance, small shops along the streets of London, especially monopolistic competitive firms, will not engage in research. 

However, having said that, if these firms are able to borrow from capital markets or get funding, or perhaps even due to external events causing temporary supernormal profits due to changes in demand and supply, they could have the willingness to invest in innovation so that they can because more “monopolistic”, when they produce a highly differentiated product.

It can be argued that monopolistic markets have firms that earn supernormal profit, because of their high barriers to entry. They therefore have both the ability and willingness to innovate to keep their monopolistic position. First, they have the ability because they earn supernormal profits, and can allocate massive funds to R&D. Second, they have the willingness because if they are in monopolistic markets that could potentially be contested by more efficient firms that could displace them to take over their market, they need to innovate to maintain their long term dynamic efficiency. 

For instance, Rolls Royce which manufacturers engines and aeroplane systems is a dynamic company probably because it has incentive and ability to innovate. BAE Systems plc is also another such company, and in fact both Rolls Royce and BAE are multinational companies, companies that span international borders with their unique product chains that require high levels of research and development. In fact, it can be said that some monopolies are monopolies because they have developed a product that is unique, differentiated, and wanted by consumers.

However, having said that, on the other hand contestable markets are usually perfectly competitive or competitive in nature, and as such competitive markets could help dynamic efficiency better in that respect. Thus competition might also lead to research and innovation, but the level could be lower than that of monopolies that have incentive and ability to do research and innovation.

Also, there are problems with monopolies. It can be argued that monopolies sometimes have x-inefficiency, where they do not act energetically to curb costs, and they could therefore become slothful and inefficient firms. This is because they may preserve their position through the use of patents, laws, legislation, and other legal means that have nothing to do with their level of technology or the sophistication of their product.

In the final analysis, this paper argued that high levels of research and innovation are best achieved in monopolistic markets, compared to competitive markets, because dynamic efficiency is best achieved when companies have the willingness and ability to conduct costly research and development, even though there are indeed some limitations to monopolies such as x-inefficiency. Competitive markets may have the incentive to conduct some research, but their levels are lower, and most of the time they neither have willingness nor ability due to the lack of barriers to entry which ensure supernormal profit. 

JC Economics Essays (H2, H3 A levels): Economics Tutor's Comments - This Economics paper on research and development and comparison of monopolistic and competitive firms was crafted under model examination conditions and has a few good points that one can learn from, but also some problematic areas, such as simplistic analysis and lack of many other relevant examples from UK manufacturing or service industries. Do think: if you were an Economics tutor, what advice would you give this student to help him make the Economics essay better? Perhaps you could focus on an area of improvement, such as the structure or organisation of this essay. Think of how this Economics paper could be made better. Thanks for reading and cheers!

Explain with relevant examples the main differences between oligopolistic and monopolistic competition. [10]

Explain with relevant examples the main differences between oligopolistic and monopolistic competition. [10] 

Tutor's Note: This is an Economics question modified and simplified from an actual “A” levels Economics examination.

This paper explains with relevant examples the main differences between oligopolistic and monopolistic competition. 

What is Oligopoly?

What is oligopoly? Oligopoly refers to a market where the barriers to entry are high, such that there exist only a few large firms in that particular industry, each with a significant market share, selling either homogeneous or differentiated products. Homogenous products are products that are perfectly substitutable for each other and have little or no product differentiation, unlike differentiated products. 

What is Monopolistic Competition?

What is monopolistic competition? Monopolistic competition, on the other hand, refers to a market where the barriers to entry are low, such that there exist many firms, each with insignificant market share, selling somewhat differentiated products. This paper deals with the characteristics first and then the nature of the products sold, and then finally the performance of the two market structures. 

Barriers to Entry for Oligopoly and MC Firms

Let us examine the characteristics of the two market structures of oligopoly and monopolistic competition. First let us deal with the barriers to entry. There are high barriers for oligopoly, for instance large economies of scale (internal EOS) in the provision of telecommunications services, whereas there are low barriers for monopolistic competition, for instance low economies of scale (internal EOS) in the clothes retails.   

Homogeneous vs Differentiated Products

Next, let us deal with the nature of the product. A product is homogenous when, for instance, every seller sells exactly the same item, for instance, petrol for cars of a certain particular grade such as 95 or 98 octane, whereas on the other hand a product is differentiated when the product sold by a firm is similar, but not exactly identical to that of its competitor’s product, be it "psychologically" or physically different, for instance, branded cars or cars of different makes and styles. 

Monopolistic competitive firms sell differentiated products, and hence as such derive their pricing power from their product differentiation, whether it is merely psychologically perceived or actually substantially differentiated. 

Oligopolies, on the other hand, can sell either differentiated or homogenous products, and their source of market power comes instead from their large market share arising from the few players that exist within that industry, and their huge economies of scale.

Profits

Let us now examine the performance of the market structures. What kind of profits would these firms earn? In the long run, only normal profits exist in monopolistic competition, while supernormal profits exist for oligopolies, so monopolistic competition is likely to be more equitable compared to oligopoly, which seems more inequitable.

Efficiencies

In terms of efficiency, there are many arguments to make to show the differences. 

First, an oligopoly may be X-inefficient – meaning that it does not work energetically to cut costs – but monopolistic competition is X-efficient as well. 

Both market structures are allocatively inefficient, where allocative efficiency refers here to P = MC, but the extent is likely much greater for oligopoly, because the price will be much higher than marginal cost for an oligopoly compared to monopolistic competition, which also has P > MC, but not by that much. 

In terms of dynamic efficiency, oligopoly generates more research and development (R&D) than monopolistic competition, and as such is more dynamic efficient because it has the willingness and ability to innovate.   

JC Economics Essays: Tutor's Comments - This Economics paper is short, sharp, sweet, and to the point, and was contributed by a hardworking, dedicated student who composed it under model examination conditions. This Economics essay is also quite well organised and structured, and structured essays are very well received by Economics examiners and teachers. Certainly, we can all learn from it, not just content knowledge but also how to craft to-the-point essays. However, there are a few possible criticisms/ issues: one, the student has not consistently used examples throughout the Economics paper (in particular, "relevant examples") to illustrate his points; two, the student could be more accurate and specific in his introduction by telling the reader, examiner, or Economics tutor reading his paper EXACTLY what he is going to do and say in the paper; three, there is no conclusion, probably because he ran out of time writing; four, he could have defined his terms better and clearer, and more consistently too. Maybe the paragraphing could be slightly better as well, and arguments could be grouped together. Having said that, this Economics essay is still good and in fact the criticisms made would not hurt it very much, because overall it is well written and in examination conditions this precision and clear economic analysis is recognised, valued, and appreciated - although it could have been further improved. Thanks for reading and cheers. 

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of Electronic Road Pricing in the United Kingdom. [25]

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of Electronic Road Pricing in the United Kingdom. [25]

Tutor's Note: My site will start having more and more Economics materials and interesting Economics topics from around the world, rather than just purely having material from Singapore or from pure Economic theory only. See here, as an illustration, for an example of an Economics essay on China's economy on JC Economics Essays. 

Introduction

This paper discusses the economic advantages and disadvantages of Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) in the United Kingdom (the UK). First, a few definitions are in order: what is ERP? ERP is the idea of congestion charges, where a charge is imposed on cars that drive within a restricted zone during certain times of the day. This paper discusses the economic advantages and disadvantages of ERP in the United Kingdom’s context.

Advantages of Electronic Road Pricing in the UK

First, ERP raises revenue for the UK government effectively, because the demand for road trips is relatively inelastic, especially during peak hours during the day. According to economic theory, relatively inelastic demand suggests that when prices are raised, revenue will increase, ceteris paribus. If the UK government gets more tax revenue, other taxes can be decreased, the government can spend more on public transport, or the budget deficit in the UK can be reduced. Hence, this method of raising revenue can be considered a major advantage.

Second, ERP can increase social efficiency. In a free market, the consumption of car trips is heavily over-consumed. This is because when people are driving, they ignore the negative externalities of congestion and pollution, and only consider their own marginal private costs and benefits. Externalities are third party spill-over effects, and can be negative or positive. In the case of cars, they produce many negative externalities to other people who are not involved in the use of private cars. The marginal social cost of driving is thus much greater than the marginal private cost of driving. 

In fact, empirically, congestion costs the UK economy billions every single year in lost output and wasted time. Pollution from cars is also a significant contributor to carbon dioxide emissions in the UK. Road charging should encourage people to look for other forms of transport which do not pollute as much. Therefore it makes sense for the government to charge a much higher price of driving in congested areas because this will make drivers internalise the externality.

Disadvantages of Electronic Road Pricing in the UK

On the other hand, there are of course certain disadvantages of ERP in the UK. First, it seems to be an intrusion on liberty. To drive one will need countless documents or be monitored by technology. The driver’s movements on the roads and whereabouts might be tracked, which could affect his freedom.

However, this point does not seem rather strong because most times when consumers use electricity or Internet access, their movements and usage are tracked as well, and hence this cannot be considered an infringement of liberty.

Secondly, the government seems to be just using ERP to raise money, which may not be politically acceptable. There could be the perception that this idea does not tackle negative externalities, but is instead a new method of raising revenue from the people.

However, that is indeed one of the reasons for the existence of income tax, Value Added Tax, and every other type of tax. Raising money from a new tax enables other taxes to be lowered or spending to be increased, and therefore this need not necessarily be negative.

Thirdly, ERP increases inequality in the UK. This is true to an extent. This is because a road pricing charge is a higher percentage of a tax for those with low incomes, relative to those with higher incomes, and as such impacts the poor more than the rich who can easily afford to drive, even with congestion charges.

However, buying a car and paying for petrol also affects inequality in the UK. If concern about the equality of income distribution is an issue, the government can alter other taxes and benefits, by taxing differently and redistributing the proceeds. A tax which increases efficiency – in this case solving the market failure of negative externalities – need not be stopped on equity grounds. It is always possible to compensate the effects to others by different redistributions of income, which is outside this paper’s arguments.

Conclusions

In conclusion, ERP clearly has both advantages and disadvantages for the UK government. First, ERP raises revenue for the UK government effectively, because the demand for road trips is relatively inelastic, especially during peak hours during the day. Second, ERP can increase social efficiency and force drivers to internalise their externalities, thus solving a market failure. On the other hand, there are of course certain disadvantages of ERP in the UK. First, it seems to be an intrusion on liberty. Secondly, there could be the perception that this idea does not tackle negative externalities, but is instead a new method of raising revenue from the people. Thirdly, ERP increases inequality in the UK by impacting the poor more than the rich.

In the final analysis, however, given that the core economic issue here seems to be the market failure of negative externalities affecting the socially efficient level of output, then ERP is indeed a good method of solving a particular market failure in the UK, and all other considerations seem to be secondary rather than primary to the core issue. 

JC Economics Essays: Tutor's Commentary - As promised, this site offers more than just topics of interest to Singapore, but also other countries and international events, situations, and much more material. Hopefully this will help you in your Economics revision, and at any rate you can get to learn more about other countries and their economies, or their economic situation, and see how general Economics concepts can be applied to different countries' contexts, and the international context as well. Observe that from a student's viewpoint (as well as an Economics tutor's viewpoint), solving congestion utilises general economic principles that apply not just to Singapore, but to other countries' contexts as well. In other words, always think of how you can APPLY Economics to DIFFERENT contexts, topics, and subjects. As usual, the usual tutor's comments apply: think of what the relevant diagrams should be; how would you improve on this answer, and how can you approach this Economics question other than using this approach? Thanks for reading, and cheers! (Acknowledgement: This Economics essay was written by a student who worked with me.) 

Compare and contrast the various types of economic efficiencies. [10]

Compare and contrast the various types of economic efficiencies. [10]

The fundamental economic problem is a problem of scarcity, necessitating choice. This is because human wants are potentially unlimited, but resources are limited, and hence choices have to be made, “efficiently”, between competing uses for the same resources. The scarce resources, or factors of production, are land, labour, capital, and entrepreneurship. Land refers to resources, gifts of nature, and other natural factors. Labour refers to human effort and work. Capital refers to any good that can be used to produced another good. Entrepreneurship refers to risk-taking, organisation, and business acumen, among other things. It can be said that efficiency is concerned with the optimal production and distribution of society’s scarce resources. This economics essay compares and contrasts the various main types of economic efficiencies – productive efficiency, allocative efficiency, dynamic and static efficiency, X-inefficiency, social efficiency, and Pareto efficiency.

Productive Efficiency

First, productive efficiency occurs when the maximum number of goods and services are produced with a given amount of inputs. This will occur on the production possibilities curve or production possibilities frontier (PPC or PPF), meaning that any point along the PPC will be productively efficient. On the PPC, it is impossible to produce more goods without producing fewer services. Productive efficiency will also occur at the lowest point on individual firms’ average cost curves (AC curves). This is because productive efficiency can be thought of as the method of least cost production, which means that production costs are minimised. Productive efficiency is not the same as the other types of efficiencies.

Think: how would you draw the PPC?

Allocative Efficiency

Second, allocative efficiency occurs when goods and services are distributed according to society’s preferences or when they are allocated in accordance with maximising society’s welfare. An economy could be productively efficient but produce goods that people that do not need, and this would be allocatively inefficient. In other words, allocative efficiency is a subset of productive efficiency, where productive efficiency is a necessary condition of allocative efficiency. (A necessary condition is a condition for some state of affairs that must be satisfied before the state of affairs can be obtained.) It should be noted that allocative efficiency occurs when the price of the good produced by a firm equals the marginal costs of production.

Dynamic Efficiency

Third, dynamic efficiency refers to efficiency over time, whereas static efficiency refers to efficiency at a particular point in time. The first concept has the element of time taken into consideration whereas the other does not consider time. Dynamic efficiency involves the introduction of new technology and working practices to reduce costs over time, whereas static means “at a fixed point in time”. Basically, this concept of dynamic means that there are changes over time whereas static means that time is held, as it were, frozen.

X-inefficiency

Fourth, X-inefficiency occurs when firms do not have incentives to cut costs. This is usually associated with monopolies, which usually pursue rent-seeking behaviour rather than think of how to lower costs. For instance, a monopoly which makes supernormal profits may have little incentive to get rid of surplus labour. Therefore, a monopolistic firm’s average costs may be higher than necessary.

Social Efficiency

Social efficiency occurs when externalities are taken into consideration and occurs at an output where the social cost of production (SMC) = the social benefit (SMB), or alternatively, the marginal social costs (MSC) = the marginal social benefits (MSB). This is closely related to both the concepts of allocative and Pareto efficiency, also known as Pareto optimality. Pareto efficiency or optimality is defined as a situation where it is not possible to make one party better off without making another party worse off. Hence, Pareto efficiency is socially efficient and also allocatively efficient, at society’s level.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there are many efficiency concepts in Economics and it is important to understand economic efficiency. Many of the concepts are related and can be understood in relation to each other.

JC Economics Essays – Tutor’s Commentary: This is a good introduction to the various “efficiencies” that Economics has to offer, not just at ‘A’ levels, but also at O, AS levels and introductory undergraduate Economics as well. ‘A’ level Economics can be quite esoteric, it is true, and this Economics material might seem difficult. Think positively instead: how could you make this Economics essay comprehensible and easily understood by you? Let’s do some counterfactual experiments here. Put yourself in the role of the Economic tutor, the examiner, or the lecturer, and you were marking this essay paper. If you were an Economics tutor, how would you judge this essay? What were its strengths and weaknesses, and why do you think – as a professional Economics tutor – those parts of the Economics essay were strengths or weaknesses? Thanks for reading, all the best and good luck!

(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.