An important function of government is to align incentives of economic agents. Government can achieve this outcome by using various tool, in particular by using laws and regulations. Government's presence affects individual choices between different types of economic activities.
An important function of government is to align incentives of economic agents. Government can achieve this outcome by using various tool, in particular by using laws and regulations. Government's presence affects individual choices between different types of economic activities.
An important function of government is to align incentives of economic agents. Government can achieve this outcome by using various tool, in particular by using laws and regulations. Government's presence affects individual choices between different types of economic activities.
function of government is to align incentives of economic agents so that private benefits would be consistent with social gains and not opposed to them. The government can achieve this outcome by using various tool, in particular by using laws and regulations. And we saw how this alignment can be accomplished in the case of contract enforcement by making sure that courts enact. And then force appropriate damages paid by contractors in case contracts are breached. So special mechanisms of contract enforcement maintained by government align incentives of the private parties, in this particular case of contractors, the dose of social interest. Now I want to give you another illustration of the same very important, critical important role of the government. And in this case government's presence affects individual choices between different types of economic activities. Some of you might have heard that activities and what the mechanics. Can very crudely be divided between different groups and types. Different clusters and they should see right away that the border line, the separation line between these two clusters that they have in mind, is not always very clear. Sometimes, oftentimes it might be quite blurred. But I'm talking about what is known as productive activities and Rent-seeking. A very general definition of productive activity is that is as activity where an economic agent and individual who is engage in this activity benefits from it She's better off, because she's engaged in this activity. But so is the society. In other words, productive activities benefits individuals that carry out such activities. And the society simultaneously, at once, the society and and, and individual. Are better off jointly, as a result of this [UNKNOWN] engagement in productual activities. Speaking metaphorically, productive activity is such that it increases social wealth. And this increase in part, or fully Is captured by the individual which is engaged in such activity. As opposed to productive activities, ransacking is something which is something which is still individually rational. An individual who is engaged in ransacking is still better off because of that engagement, but the society is not better off. In fact the society often time is worse off as a result of an [UNKNOWN] engagement and ransack and simply because ransacking does not create new wealth, does not create new value. An individual is better off simply because she distributes to herself A part of the wealth, or part of the wealth that was already in the society. You can argue that productive activities are a positive-sum game, whereas rent-seeking, at best, is a zero-sum game. Oftentime, rent-seeking is a negative-sum game. It is a negative-sum game simply because rent-seeking suppresses incentives Of the individuals who would like to be engaged in productive activities from such engagement. Because such individuals are suspect that some of the return, some of the payoffs to their productive activities will be taken away from them by rent-seekers. So the damage of rent-seeking to the society It's two-fold. First of all the society suffers because some resources are redeployed from productive use to rent-seeking. It suffers furthermore because it reduces the incentives of individuals who would like to be engaged in productive activities. To do so. Rent-seeking and Productive activities are perhaps the clearest case when individual rationality and social needs are dramatically opposite to each other. And therefore it for-mounts for good governments to redirect human resources and other resources which exist in the economy from rent-seeking to <<Productive activities now the important thing to keep in mind is that resources that are available to the economy are most of the time multi-purpose resources and this is certainly the case with human resources Individual decide in which errors economy to operate, what careers, what jobs, what functions, and so forth to choose for themselves, depending on the anticipated payoffs, and it's very important that individuals, while making these choices And give preference to productive activities verses rent-seeking, because from what I told you so far, it's easy for you to realize that societies and economies were rent-seeking were, were, reigned supreme, where many individuals had engaged in rent-seeking. It should be a very poor economy. Because very little is produced in such economies. And much of the energy that exists is directed, is targeted toward redistribution rather than to production. Vice-versa, if the recent economy were all of the energy talent. Entrepreneurship, time, effort, and so forth. Have contributed to productive activities. In such economies, we should expect a lot of prosperity. And this is a very common theme in modern literature, and the famous American economist William Bomore illustrated. The choice of individuals of various activities between productive activities and rent-seeking very clearly and very vividly by by comparative analysis of patterns observed in histories of different countries around the world. >> If you look back at the history you see certain periods of time in certain countries features literal explosions of entrepreneurial activities, Industrial Revolution in the west late 19th century in the United States, in China you name it, you see times and periods were Lots and lots of people are engaged as entrepreneurs and as a result quite clearly they advance economic development. On the other hand, in some countries in some periods of history you see almost no entrepreneurship. It's heavily suppressed. You see no innovations. You see no new markets. You see no new technologies. You see no new ideas. You see none of that. So, how could you explain this differences as normal in answers? Well, it's not necessarily, because there are fewer potential entrepreneurs In country A, in one period, then country B at perhaps another period of time, it's simply because the conditions in these countries are different. It's simply because government policies in these countries are different. In country A, where we see a lot of entrepreneurship, governments protect property rights. Governments provide enabling conditions for private enterprise. And as a result people with imagination, with energy, and vision, people willing to take risks. In other words would the entrepreneurs, become entrepreneurs in the productive sense of the word? Whereas another contrast, the very same people People who are creativity, energy, vision, they are going to be those risk-taking individuals who will contribute all of these qualities, all of these resources towards rent-seeking. And they will be searching for different ways to do well, to enrich themselves, not by contributing to society, but by successfully. More successful than others taking away from this society by coming up with different ideas and means as to how to navigate through confused regulation as to how successful the lobby government as to how to be more than frauds. Which are perhaps on the other side of the law, but because law enforcement is weak, people can get away with this, so on and so forth. So according to Balmoral entrepreneurs are among us all the time, in all countries. But the difference is to which areas of activities entrepreneurs contribute their outstanding skills. And qualities, and this is the choice between ransacking and protect activities. And of course, this choice depends on the quality of government institutions, on the strength of government. It depends first and foremost on how strong the governments protect property rights. Property rights protection is one of the main functions of governments. So let me give you a very simple illustration which shows. How the degree of property rights protection affects individual's choices, between production and rent-seeking. And how, as a result, it contributes to the wealth of nations. This inequality compares outcomes, payoffs, of an individual's engagement in productive activities. Or. Rent-seeking, where the number of people who are already engaged in production is x. And as you can see, depending on what the government does, and the level of property rights protection theta is in fact the government's choice variable. If the government's choice variable These payoffs look differently. If property rates are better protected, then productions become relatively more attractive than grant seeking. Still, we should expect that if that is between zero and one, there will always be some people in case in, in production in. In rent-seeking, but what matters is the proportion, is the number of people who are engaged in collective activities, and this proportion characterizes an equilibrium, and this equilibrium, in its turn, depends on how effectively the government does its job. And this equilibrium itself affects the wealth of this economy. Let me illustrate to you this equilibrium by a simple diagram. The bottom graph, I see this curve which is the graph of the production function. And as you see It does exhibit decreasing returns to scale. The total wealth of this society depends on x and the greater is the number of people who are in engaged in product production. The welfare of this society is so quite obviously social optimum Is is achieved when x equals1 and in that case total gains are F of x. No piracy in chemical engineering in this case are two alternative activities, and although we respect chemical engineering much more than piracy, we respective [UNKNOWN] more than rent-seeking. What we're concerned about at this time is the net gains. Is the total benefits that economic agents accrue in different equilibrium. And, these net gains, as I said, depend very strongly on government policies. Let's consider a particular level of property rights protection. Theta. and, in this case the payoffs to production will be theta F prime of x. And this is indeed the, the climbing curve, its negatively sloped curve. The payoff to rent-seeking will be 1 minus theta F of x or 1 minus x. And it's easy to to verify that this is a positively sloped curve. And these two curves intersect in this particular point and this is the equilibrium. In this equilibrium, the level of production is x and the society's welfare is F of x. Now, suppose that the protection of property rights for some reason has been reiterated and that will lead to the movement of this curve to the left according to this arrow. And because that is getting smaller To the left or down, which is the same thing here. That is getting smaller. And, as a result, this curve, which describes payoffs to rent-seeking is moving upward or also to the left. So the equilibrium used to be here. And now, the equilibrium is here. And we see that its equilibrium level Of involvement in production is much smaller. A larger proportion of people are involved in piracy and much more in production, and as a result, the new equilibrium level will make the society quite a bit poorer. In this equilibrium, the government is doing much better than in this one, and as a result, in this equilibrium the economy is considerably more prosperous than in this one. And again this is a good illustration how we can only develop in economic conditions depend on the quality of government and it's also a good illustration that a important role of government is to affect private sector conditions in a way that align individual incentives. Great [UNKNOWN]. And property rights are well protected. Capable individuals will be much better at production than in rent-seeking. In production is something that in the interest of the society. When property rights are poorly protected, when the government is failing to convince more important count. Then capable individuals will do a lot simply better in rent-seeking than in production activities. And in this case, individual rationality is far apart from social optimality, from social welfare. [MUSIC] [MUSIC] [BLANK_AUDIO]