Unit 5: Welfare Economics
Meaning of Social Welfare
Welfare Economics is the branch of economics that studies how the allocation of resources and goods affects the overall well-being of society.
Social Welfare itself is a broad concept, generally referring to the total utility or satisfaction of all individuals in a society. It tries to answer the question, "What is the best allocation of resources for society as a whole?"
Welfare economics attempts to:
- Define and measure social welfare.
- Evaluate the economic efficiency of different market outcomes (e.g., monopoly vs. perfect competition).
- Provide a framework for government policies that aim to improve social well-being (e.g., taxes, subsidies, regulations).
A key problem is how to aggregate the "utility" (satisfaction) of many different people, especially since utility cannot be easily measured or compared between individuals.
Pigovian Welfare Economics
This approach, named after economist Arthur C. Pigou, was one of the first major attempts to analyze social welfare. Pigou's work focused on the concept of externalities and market failure.
Market Failure and Externalities
Pigou pointed out that the free market (private costs and benefits) does not always lead to the best outcome for society (social costs and benefits). A market failure occurs when the market fails to allocate resources efficiently.
The main cause of this divergence is externalities:
- Private Cost: The cost incurred by the producer (e.g., labor, materials).
- Social Cost: The total cost to society.
Social Cost = Private Cost + External Cost
- Negative Externalities (External Costs):
- Occur when the production or consumption of a good imposes a cost on a third party not involved in the transaction.
- Example: A factory pollutes a river. The factory (producer) ignores the cost of pollution, but society (fishermen, local residents) bears this cost.
- Here, Social Cost > Private Cost.
- The free market will over-produce the good (produce more than the socially optimal level).
- Positive Externalities (External Benefits):
- Occur when the production or consumption of a good provides a benefit to a third party.
- Example: A person gets a vaccination. They get a private benefit (won't get sick), but society also gets an external benefit (they won't spread the disease to others). Other examples include education and R&D.
- Here, Social Benefit > Private Benefit.
- The free market will under-produce the good (produce less than the socially optimal level).
Pigou's Solution: Taxes and Subsidies
To correct these market failures and maximize social welfare, Pigou proposed government intervention:
- For Negative Externalities (like pollution): Impose a Pigovian Tax on the producer. The tax should be equal to the value of the external cost. This "internalizes the externality" by forcing the producer to pay the full social cost, leading to a reduction in output to the socially optimal level.
[]
- For Positive Externalities (like education): Provide a Pigovian Subsidy to the producer or consumer. The subsidy should be equal to the value of the external benefit. This encourages more consumption/production, raising it to the socially optimal level.
[]
The goal of Pigovian welfare economics is to align private interests with social interests to achieve maximum social welfare (where Social Cost = Social Benefit).
Pareto Optimality
This concept, named after Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, provides a different, more limited, way of defining efficiency. It avoids the problem of comparing utility between people.
Pareto Optimality (or Pareto Efficiency): A state of allocation of resources in which it is impossible to make any one individual better off without making at least one other individual worse off.
A Pareto Improvement is any change that makes at least one person better off without making anyone else worse off. When no more Pareto improvements are possible, the situation is "Pareto Optimal."
Important Note: Pareto Optimality is a concept of
efficiency, not
equity (fairness).
- An allocation where one person has 100% of the resources and everyone else has 0% is Pareto Optimal (because you can't give anything to anyone else without *taking* it from the first person, making them worse off).
- An allocation where resources are divided equally might also be Pareto Optimal.
Pareto's criterion cannot judge which of these "fairer." It only states that there is no "waste" in the system.
The Three Conditions for Pareto Optimality:
A "General Equilibrium" (all markets at once) is Pareto Optimal if three efficiency conditions are met. These are often shown using an Edgeworth Box diagram.
- 1. Efficiency in Consumption (Exchange):
- Meaning: Goods are distributed among consumers so that you can't redistribute them to make someone happier without making someone else less happy.
- Condition: The Marginal Rate of Substitution (MRS) between any two goods must be the same for all consumers.
- MRS_XY (Person A) = MRS_XY (Person B)
- This occurs at all points of tangency between the indifference curves of the two consumers on the Consumption Contract Curve.
- 2. Efficiency in Production:
- Meaning: Inputs (labor, capital) are allocated among producers so that you can't reallocate them to produce more of one good without producing less of another.
- Condition: The Marginal Rate of Technical Substitution (MRTS) between any two inputs must be the same for all producers.
- MRTS_LK (Good X) = MRTS_LK (Good Y)
- This occurs at all points of tangency between the iso-quants of the two goods on the Production Contract Curve. The set of these efficient points forms the Production Possibility Frontier (PPF).
- 3. Efficiency in Product Mix (Overall Efficiency):
- Meaning: The combination of goods being produced matches the combination that consumers want to consume.
- Condition: The Marginal Rate of Transformation (MRT) must equal the consumers' Marginal Rate of Substitution (MRS).
- MRT_XY = MRS_XY
- (MRT is the slope of the PPF; MRS is the slope of the community indifference curve).
The First Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics states that any competitive equilibrium (like in Perfect Competition) leads to a Pareto Optimal allocation.
Social Welfare Function
The concept of Pareto optimality gives us many efficient points (all points on the contract curve), but it doesn't tell us which one is "best" for society. This is where the Social Welfare Function (SWF) comes in.
A Social Welfare Function, introduced by Abram Bergson and Paul Samuelson, is a way to rank different Pareto-optimal allocations. It is essentially a "social indifference curve" that shows combinations of individual utilities (e.g., Utility of Person A and Utility of Person B) that give society the same level of overall welfare.
W = f(U_A, U_B, U_C, ...)
Where W is social welfare, and U_A, U_B, etc., are the utility levels of individuals A, B, etc.
The shape of the SWF depends on society's views on equity:
- Utilitarian (Benthamite) SWF: W = U_A + U_B. Society aims to maximize the *total* sum of utilities. It treats all individuals equally.
- Rawlsian (Maximin) SWF: W = min(U_A, U_B). Society aims to maximize the welfare of the worst-off person. This implies a strong preference for equality.
The "Bliss Point"
To find the single best point for society, we combine two concepts:
- The Utility Possibility Frontier (UPF): This curve shows the maximum utility one person can get for any given level of utility for the other person (derived from the Edgeworth Box contract curve). All points on the UPF are Pareto-optimal.
- The Social Welfare Function (SWF): A map of social indifference curves.
The "Bliss Point," or the constrained optimum, is the single point where the Utility Possibility Frontier (UPF) is tangent to the highest possible Social Welfare Function (SWF) curve. This point is (in theory) the one allocation that is both Pareto-efficient and maximizes social welfare according to society's values.
[]