Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CONTENTS
Public Goods........................................................................................................................................................... 29
Externalities. .......................................................................................................................................................... 32
Negotiations II ............................................................................................................................................................. 44
Multi-issue Negotiations ............................................................................................................................................. 44
Valuing Life........................................................................................................................................................ 70
Probability .............................................................................................................................................................. 81
Political Analysis 94
Introduction
• What is public policy?
• What is policy analysis?
• Goals of the course
• Organization of the course
What is Analysis
• Analysis = taking apart, breaking into components
• Description: what is happening?
• Explanation: why is it happening? (treating symptoms versus problem itself)
• Prediction: what will happen if… (we implement this policy in current situation, what are unintended
consequences?)
• Prescription: what should we do? From whose perspective? Who votes? Are the people who get to vote
the most affected?
Take it apart, describe it, explain it, try to predict all results, and prescribe
Example: Iraq
What’s the Problem?
• Syria and Iran
• Presence of Americans
• Insufficient troop levels
• Ethnic makeup of police force
• Country not ready for democracy/power sharing?
• Presence of foreign occupying force
• Energy resources (another agenda)
• Middle east political stability (Iraq isn’t the problem, we need to consider entire region)
Political Analysis
• informing political strategy (who are we dealing with?)
• Informing policy analysis
POSITIVE
• renewable sources of
energy
• access to new ports
• new land
• access to oil!
Regulation • Burn/consume
less
• Renewables
• Increase access
public
transportation
• With a tax, we raise price, create large separation between wealthy and poor. Who is the tax on? Poor:
cant drive back and forth to work
Section Meeting January 17, 2007
Memos
Executive Summary: 3-4 sentences, summarize entire paper. Be direct, upfront, say it and be done with it.
Relatively short sentences, no jargon or flowery language.
For different points, use headers and some separation. We aren’t writing in paragraph form.
ANSWER THE QUESTION! Don’t go off topic. Analyze the question and don’t discuss it
Every sentence should have a purpose. Use active verbs. Don’t conclude the memo, don’t summarize anything.
(memo is meant to advise someone briefly, superior doesn’t have time to read memo)
Individual Interests and Collective Action January 18, 2007
COORDINATION GAMES
• Definition: Both ‘win’ or both ‘lose’
o Example: which Tire?
Four students partying, sleep in and miss midterm. Call the professor, tell that have flat
tire. Reschedule exam, take exam, and ask students which tire blew.
o Example: Meeting in New York City
Left Right
Left (8,8) (0,0)
Party Home
Party (8,8) (0,0)
Party Home
Party (8,6) (0,0)
Stag Hunt
Stag Rabbit
Stag (9,9) (0,8)
COMPETITIVE GAMES
• Definition: If you ‘win’ I ‘lose’
• Also called ‘zero sum’ payoffs + losses = ZERO. My gain is your loss
• Examples
o Odds and Evens
o Chess and other parlor games
o Battle of Bismarck Sea
The Battle of Bismarck Sea
World War II, Pacific War, march 2, 1943- march 4
Location: Bismarck Sea, in the vicinity of the island Lae
Some definitions:
• Maxi-min strategy: the strategy with the best “worst” outcome. We want to maximize the worst possible
outcome, or minimize the damage.
o We opt for strategy that avoids worst possible outcome
• Dominant Strategy: A strategy is dominant if it does better than all other strategies in at least one
circumstance and as well as every other strategy in all circumstances (never loses)
• Dominated Strategy: a strategy is dominated by another if it does worse in at least one circumstance and
no better in all (never wins)
• Equilibrium: an outcome is in equilibrium if no party regrets its choice of strategy, no player has incentive
to move away, no player regrets his or her choice.
o Ask if either player would want to switch out of situation if they could, without moving other
player’s choice
To win must send message to other guy that you are crazy and won’t swerve!
TWO EQUILIBRIUM: top right, bottom left
Out of the box solution to Global Warming: Netherlands huge problems with flooding: building houses that float.
• Prisoner’s Dilemma
o Social implications
• sequential games
PARETO EFFICIENCY
• n outcome is Pareto efficient if it is not possible to make one party better off without hurting another
player
• An outcome is Pareto inefficient if one (or more) party can be made better off without hurting another
Which points are pareto efficient? (D,C) (C,D) (C,C)
Pareto inefficient Point: (D,D) both players could be made better off!
SEQUENTIAL GAMES:
• Examples: tic tac toe, Checkers, chess
• Going first may be advantage or disadvantage
Second number is Lucy’s payoff
Two lines through branch indicate “We aren’t going that way”
The arrow indicates the direction we go
If Charley thinks about incentive structures facing Lucy, he would never kick the ball
Backwards induction: start at back/end of tree
• think about what lucy going to do
• and then figure out what I am going to do
It is an advantage to go first
The United states and Iran are both desperately trying to go first by committing to a strategy
When you aren’t sure who is going first, game of chicken dangerous in politics
• Why does nuclear deterrence work?
• Where do these payoffs come from?
o Logically thinking how players would rank outcomes
REPEATED GAMES
• Rounds
• Strategy in the shadow of the future: taking into account today what payoffs might follow from this
decision in the future
• Reputation and trust: are very important. Desired reputation depends on what game you are playing (as
nice and trustworthy, irrational in Chicken , etc)
3 3 C C
1 4 C D
2 2 D D
2 2 D D
2 2 D D
MULTI-PARTY GAMES
• coalitions
• voting
• multi-party Prisoners dilemma
Markets or Governments?
Ex: Medicare/Medicaid
We have an aging population and skyrocketing HC costs, by 2050 the entire budget will be consumed by
these two programs!
Pro Market Position: markets are efficient Governments are wasteful and (sometimes) don’t act in the public
interest
Pro Government Position: markets are unfair and sometimes inefficient. Governments act in the public interest
PPS 55 Stance: When do markets produce desired outcomes and when don’t they?
What is a Market?
• An institution for coordinating voluntary exchange between individuals
• Exchanging
o Goods and services
• Individuals:
o Buyers and sellers
Key Questions
• when do markets work?
• When are markets efficient?
• When are market outcomes desirable?
o Moral issues: lower income individuals cannot afford
MARKET DEMAND
• Froot Loops
• Won’t pay as much for each additional box
PRODUCER’S SUPPLY
Determinants of Supply
• costs of input
o labor, sugar, flour, vitamins
• technology
o machinery, materials
• prices of related outputs
Demand curve = willingness to pay
Supply curve = willingness to produce
Compensation is not necessarily proportionate to your skill. (professional sports players, CEOs)
January 30, 2007 MARKET FAILURES
MARKET FAILURES
• Public Goods
• Externalities
• Market Power (monopoly, cartels)
• Imperfect information
PUBLIC GOODS
• definition
o low “rivalry” in consumption (zero marginal cost of production)
o (often) impossibility of exclusion, or costly to exclude
• Negotiations
o Cheating
o Enforcement
• Government
• Privatization
• Social Norms –attach public stigma, encourage behavior, give sticker to vote!
Network externalities: a positive consumption externality, if I’m the only person in the world with a cell phone,
only me and my mom can interact in the network. As more people join the network, the network increases in
value.
so we should raise demand curve by that amount, because there is benefit to third partes
Solving Externalities
• regulation
• Incentives (internalizing the Externality)
o Tax
o Subsidize
• Negotiated compensation: winners pay losers
Coase’s Theorum: It doesn’t matter who is doing paying… if property rights are well assigned in advance, then
parties can negotiate amongst themselves and come up with solutions!
Requirements:
WHAT IS NEGOTIATION?
When do we Negotiate?
• Daily life
o who cleans the room
o how much to pay for the car
• Workplace
• Law
• Policy and politics
o Passing a law
o International treaties
Bush plan for Iraq
Parties
• who plays? It isn’t always so obvious
• Two or more?
• Monolithic or not? (making decisions independently) Congress has to back the president
o 2 level games – Is ratification required?
o What is the deadline? (expiration presidential term)
o Does needing approval later an advantage or a disadvantage? Could help!
Issues
• dimensions of joint choice
• one or more?
• Are the issues and subsequent negotiations recurrent/repetitive?
• Linkage effects (DOHA)(sanctions): connecting a payoff to a negotiation. If we’re negotiating about cotton
and we can’t make an agreement, if we link it to something else, then we might be able to reach a deal.
o Earmarks must be made transparent… sneaking something into bill, maybe to get them to agree,
make incentive to pass bill because there is some other payoff to him.(making a side deal so loss
is offset elsewhere)
o Log-rolling: you vote for this bill, and I’ll vote for yours (a tradeoff)
• In Salty Dog, one issue: price.
Interests
• preferences with respect to issue outcomes
o some idea of what they want out of negotiation, inherent to them
• competing interests (I want window, you don’t)
• complementary interests (harmonious, more coordination games, we both want window, have to work
out details) we seek the same goal
• convergent interests (not necessarily competing, but not entirely in agreement) we have issues!
o Britain and US have convergent interests… not same, but aligned in what they want out of
situation.
• In salty dog: competitive
o Buyer wants low price
o Seller wants high price
Alternatives
• is agreement required? You think you are negotiating over X, but the alternatives wind up dictating the
agreement. Alternatives are important in outcome of negotiation
o is it always mandatory to reach an agreement? It isn’t always optional… we can fail to meet
deadline, but must come up with emergency plan
• Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement (BATNA). What is your BATNA? What is your “best alternative
to a negotiated agreement?
o (If you don’t reach an agreement)
• reservation price or value:
o reservation price:
o buyer’s is 16,000, most willing to pay
o seller’s is 13,500, most willing to sell
o what is the value? We might value something differently than what our reservation price is. The
car may be valued at 25,000, but we know can’t sell for more than 15,000
• better alternatives strengthen bargaining position
The surplus is a value space. Each possible agreement is a point on this line
Pareto Efficiency!
PARETO EFFICIENCY
• A pareto improvement makes at least one party better off and no party worse off
• An outcome is pareto efficient if there are no possible pareto improvements
Distributive Bargaining
• leaning and influencing (divvy up fixed good or value)
• Anchoring and framing
o First offers
• Commitment
o Patterns of Concession
• The EndGame
• Ethics
Anchoring
• people make estimates by starting from an initial value
• adjustments
• tend to typically insufficient
• Percentage of UN members that are African?
• “10”: 25% “65”: 45%
ISSUE SPACE. Framing High: pushed in favor of the seller, seller first offer is high. Risk of going too high and
having other person think you are ridiculous
NEGOTIATIONS II
MULTI-ISSUE NEGOTIATIONS
Escalation
• Logic of Escalation
o Sunk costs
o Marginal calculation
o “Actions that appear rational when taken one at a time, can lead to disaster in the long run.
o Psychology of escalation
Dollar Auction
Arguing how to divvy up pie
Multi-Issue Negotiations
• one issue negotiations are largely about dividing a fixed pie
• multi issue negotiations are about baking a bigger pie (and dividing it)
Issues
• number of aircraft Nari + GD -
• barrels of oil Nari - GD +
• support levels Nari + GD -
• timing of delivery Nari - GD +
• guarantee Nari - GD -
• radar Nari + GD +
• spare parts Nari + GD -
Alternatives
• reservation values are given
o Nari = 900
o GD = 500
o We need to map these in value space and convert these to utils
Sources of Joint Gains
• finding complementary interests
• trading on differences in relative preferences
Integrative Bargaining
• Tactics for Creating Value
o Sharing information
o Joint Problem Solving
Modes of Government
• direct provision of goods or services
• market perfecting (or improving)
• regulation
• negotiation facilitation
• redistribution
Direct Provision
• pure public goods such as Defense
• “tax and spend” may be pareto improving
• Problem: imperfect public goods (it isn’t clear they actually exist)
• Examples
o Location-specific goods: a national park?
People that live closer can benefit more
o Group specific goods: NEA? PBS?
Market Perfecting
• Taxes or subsidies
• Aligning private costs and benefits with social costs and benefits
• Examples
o Gasoline taxes
o Research subsidies (or tax breaks)
• Issues
o how much is enough?
o Income and distribution effects
Regulation
• restricting private actions not in the “Public interest”
• Examples
o Driver’s licenses
o Drinking age
o Pesticide
o Food additives
• Issues
o Enforcement leads to inefficiencies, equity is also an issue
Negotiation Facilitation
• contract enforcement
• judicial system is government’s way or trying to enforce contracts
• Mediation: get two sides to come to agreement
• Arbitration: parties both agree that YOU come up with solution
Redistribution
• Rationales for redistribution
o Initial endowments
o Unfair processes
o “lumpy” prizes
• Policies
o Progressive taxation: you pay more if you earn more
o Social insurance (persons with higher income less eligible for benefits, Medicare)
o Affirmative action
1. Everybody gets 1
2. Preferences
3. Fight over them
4. Consider what people already have, initial assets
5. Lottery system
6. Give out by age or sex
7. Have a dictator
8. Voting system (popularity contest)
9. Dukies
We have to decide what our goals are, and agree, and then narrow down options, and systematically evaluate
each strategy, do that one
We could vote
OPTION 2: VOTING
• voting to reveal welfare
o individuals judge their own interests
o majority may be better off
Issues
• does not measure strength of preferences
• Voting does not guarantee a unique “winner” (Arrow’s impossibility theorem)
• “Tyranny” of the majority
We do analysis
Who is being helped, harmed
Could winners compensate losers
Equity Considerations
• Ad hoc consideration
o If there are equity concerns, address then separately
Reached agreement today. Talks teetering on brink of collapse because of disagreement of what should be
guaranteed to NK for ending nuclear program. Was making excessive demands electricity and oil… but we don’t
have option of walking away. Out BATNA is so bad that we MUST settle within the ZOPA. They demanded 2
million tons heavy fuel oil. They have record of starting from unrealistic bargaining position – this is where history
of negotiations comes in. We have history so we know this is excessive demand that is going to be coming down.
This negotiation went on for 16 hours… NK agreed to shut down facilities for 1 million. They got half of what they
asked for. Deal sends wrong signal around world – if you hold along long enough in negotiation, you are rewarded.
So we damaged our reputation. The US had to say that we are going to walk away.
• does not address equity questions (we only care about the net benefit)
Equity Considerations
• Ad-Hoc consideration
o If there are equity concerns, address them separately. SO we consider them, but don’t let them
change our decision/stop us from realizing that society overall is net benefit.
o Could use explicit weighting choices
• Heavy weighting bias towards equal distributions
o The poor literally count more, or
o Heavy weighting bias towards equal distributions
As we Proceed…
Talked about going to look at houses and looking at two and eliminating one to simplify it
Cost benefit analysis focuses on the red square… the benefits versus the cost, and comparing them with the status
quo. Do we end up with a net benefit?
• value measured by individual willingness to pay (it all comes down to individual willingness to pay… how
much do people value outcomes, in dollar amounts?)
• Benefits: goods and services that people value!
• Costs: represent foregone goods and services that people value (we could have done something else with
that money… it’s the opportunity cost)
• Limited resources opportunity Cost
Decision Process
(take some away, these are costs) so cut away a piece of the pie.
And hopefully end up with a little bigger pie as a result of paying for the cost
• City of Durham is considering building two new tennis courts on land owned by the city
Social Costs
Construction -500 -9,500 -10,000
Land -500 -9,500 -10,000
Transfers
Fee -20,000 +20,000 0
• we are assuming that 5 percent of Durham taxpayers are tennis players and that the tax is distributed
evenly across residents
We do an internal transfer between the people, and still wind up with 5,000.
Problem: the fee is forced on people… there is a DWL to society… introducing a fee might change the
behavior of people, (like a tax) and change the equilibrium
We see that this is very inequitable. Some people are benefiting a lot, others are losing a lot
Issue: Transfers
The people who value playing tennis LESS than the fee aren’t going to pay tennis anymore! We lose part of the
benefit because of the fee. From the perspective of the city, this is BAD, we want optimal benefit for people in
society.
Types of Transfers
• Fees
• Taxes
• Subsidies
• If there is no change in behaviors, then there is no change in net benefits.
• If transfers change behaviors, then net benefits can change
o Example: Medicaid. (at certain threshold, people eligible for benefit… may not take job if it
makes them ineligible)
Issue: Why is Labor a Cost?
Issue: Standing
Social Benefits
Tennis 12,500 0 25,000
Social Costs
Construction -500 -9,500 -10,000
Land -500 -9,500 -10,000
Transfers
Fee -20,000 +20,000 0
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a094/print/a094.html
• standing (continued)
• Sensitivity Analysis
• Dealing with intangibles
• Case: lead in gasoline
• Case: Alamodome
Issue: Standing
Social Benefits
Tennis 12500 0 12500
Social Costs
Construction -500 -9500 -10000
Land -500 -9500 -10000
Outsider Fees
Social Benefits
Tennis 12500 0 12500
Duke Players Fee 10000
Social Costs
Construction -500 -9500 -10000
Land -500 -9500 -10000
Transfers
Residents Fee -10000 +10000 0
• Implication
• BENEFITS
o Conventions – C
o Other revenue to city – tourism – T
o Sports attendance – 50,000 seats X 10 events/year X $50 X (years last in future)
Paying ticket price is actually a TRANSFER
• Revenue (advertisements) IF from outside
o If is internal then it’s a TRANSFER
• Increased property values (we have to be careful with multiplier effect, that we don’t count money twice.
• TV Viewing: Other people get to watch game on TV (measure by opportunity cost of watching TV, how
much pay for cable station.
Benefits/ Costs of Alamodome
• Political Costs
• Paying $$ for preliminary analysis to promote – use only if contingent on continuing the project
• Use costs after decision making
• Need production costs for what is to happen in the arena
• Did not calculate $$ of getting an NFL team
• How much is $100 next year worth to you today? –value of money-
• In thinking of the future how is money valued?
• Take lump sum today vs larger amount in the future
Interest Rates
• if r=.15
• 100/(1+.15) = 86.96
• PV of a in yr n = a/(1+r) to n power
The discount rate matters most for distant benefits and costs
• discount rate of .1
• 100 in 2 years = 100 (1+.1)^2
Viability of Projects
• can be altered depending on time and amount of discount rate
Sensitivity Analysis
• Analysis to assumption
• Dr of .10 on problem (see green dot)
• Issue would a different rate lead to a different decision
• If rate higher or lower how could it flip?
• Assumption that this problem is linear
• Recalculate with lower dr (see green dot 3)
Example widening I 40
• widen between durham and Raleigh
• cost now and in future
• see note sheet and green dot 4
Sensitivity Analysis
• would a different discount rate make a difference
• if r = .5 then d =.952
Inescapable Tradeoffs
• in public and private accounting
• decisions are made in isolation,, everything has value vis a vie something ekse
• buying a car
• supporting public radio
• budgeting for pre natal care
Revealed Preference
• Approach 1: wage compensation for risky jobs- $ extra paid for job
o How much more are we willing to pay for people to take jobs that put them at risk?
o Being a professor is less dangerous than being a miner
o Could help gage the value of a life
• Approach 2: price premium for safety devices
o Increased cost of airbags – willing to pay $100 for a .01% reduced risk of death – helps value life
• Problems
o Workers may not be free to choose wages then would not reflect the risk
o Workes may be misinformed
o Maybe paying for factors other than mortality
Ex: broken leg – health risks, but not life
o Consumers may be misinformed
o Equity: the poor count less
Reproduced valuations based on initial endowments depends on how much money
you have
The government has some limited amount of $$ to put into programs must put dollar value on people’s lives to
allocate that money and implement policies
Baby versus old person we pick the baby but can we put a worth on that?
• problems
o phasing of survey affects the response
o information/knowledge affects response
o strategic misrepresentation
o low probabilities are hard for us to think about
o equity: poor count less
o chance of death is 2%- how much are you willing to pay for a program which will improve
neonatal care and reduce risk of morality by 6%
Inescapable Tradeoffs
- COPENHAGEN CONSENSUS ranked world problems in order of return to investment
o Assumption: we have a fixed pie of resources to allocate to world problems
o Winners: AIDS, vaccinations, malaria, water
o Losers: global warming
Very controversial because this affects everyone: AIDS does not
• had an operating value of ONE LIFE – not valuing a western life more than an African life
o people got very upset because a lot of problems (many in Africa) got more attention/would get
more money than ones that affect us
Efficient Frontier?
- the Harvard Life saving study
o calculated how much it costs to save a life in many different programs sometimes it costs less
or more
o discovered that we are not actually on the efficient frontier in terms of lives saved nwith the
money we invest
o if we chose policies on whether the were effective at saving lives we could be DOUBLE the
amount of lives saved
ex: it costs a lot more to save 1 life by installing seatbelts in the rear middle seat of all
cars than by administering AIDS tests
Examples on uncertainty
• career decisions
• medical decisions
• plea bargaining litigation
• disaster planning eg biological terrorism
Decision Analysis
• Technique for modeling decisions under uncertainty
• Uncertainty modeled as a probability – out a figure estimate on what we think an event will be
Alamodome Example
• Key choice: build or not
• If don’t build what next?
• If build what then?
• First thing to put in model is decision
• Key uncertainty will the team come? Do we know the uncertainty – element not know
• probabilities
Switchpoint for p
• switchpoint for values
Robust or sensitive
• if switchpoint is far from estimated value, decision is robust. Will have to change probability a lot before
changing decision. Value of 50 million vs 200 million would need to be wrong in original assumption to
have a robust value
• if switchpoint is close to estimated value – decision is sensitive- close to assumption
nd
2 cut analysis national petroleum reserve
• issue: all embargos are not alike
• can be partial or total
• partial embargos are much less costly
rd
3 cut analysis: the national energy plan
• what if having a reserve has a deterrent effect- that is having a reserve makes it less likely that other
countries will embargo?
March 6, 2007 Introduction to Decision Analysis
In our memos, the things we didn’t know weren’t necessarily uncertain, we just didn’t have that information.
Challenging for policy makers to make decisions about things they are uncertain about.
Uncertainties…
Public Health: disease, research, predicting scenarios
North Korea: how will they respond? Will they conform?
Iraq!
P(Duke > NC State) * P(Duke > Virginia) * P(Duke > Virginia Tech) * P(Duke > Carolina)
.80 * .55 * .65 * .20 = .0528 = 5.28% of winning the ACC tournament
• Assumes odds of beating one team does not depend on outcome of previous games
• Three Choices
o Do nothing
o Invest in stock market (to try and increase value of holdings, support more ppl)
o Privatize (no longer government’s responsibility)
• Key Uncertainties
o Future stock returns
o Future economic growth
Privatization: save 100 billion from not having to collect taxes, etc.
Issues in Modeling
• Getting the branches right
o Mutually exclusive
o Collectively exhaustive
Sometimes the best option is neither of the extremes… always think of other options we
could put on the table.
• Start simple. Add complexity where most needed
o Sensitivity analysis (there must be this when we have uncertainty)
Ex. For social security: how sensitive is my analysis to that probability? At what point
(how high would I have to raise that probability) before going into the stock market
becomes a better option than…
o Second (third, etc.) cuts
PROBABILITY
EQUALLY LIKELY!
Probability Quiz
• You see a man in his mid 20s with long hair wearing faded blue jeans. Is it more likely that he is
o A graduate student in Germanic studies or
o A business school student (but if we saw him in FUQUA, we would change our bias/view)
3. all of outcomes at end branches add up to 1
4. this is the entire universe of B, B happening when A happens, and when it doesn’t
• Question on midterm!
•
• Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she
was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in anti-nuclear
demonstrations
Conjunction Fallacy
• the probability of two events occurring together (in conjunction) will always be lower than the probability
of either one occurring alone (assuming either probability is not zero)
• Other biases
o False consensus effect – of course you think like me!
o Positive outcome bias – we overestimate the probability of good outcomes happening to us,
optimistic, dangerous from a policy perspective.
o If there is evidence in a story, we tend to think it is more probable to happen
The Value of Information- but how valuable is it, and how much should we pay for it?
• always good to obtain more information to make probability estimate more accurate
Screening Tests
Let’s use…
P(HIV|+) = p(HIV) * P(+|HIV)
[p(HIV) * p(+|HIV)] + [p(no HIV) * p(+|No HIV)]
= .09 * .95
[.09 *.95] + [.91 *.02]
The FDA does this all the time, at some point says “we’re good,” and they let the drug on the market. Where is
that point? How valuable is it to keep getting more information?
Calculate the switch point: T = 2.6, the maximum amount we are willing to pay for the Test.
Types of Probability
Important to remember that probabilities are tricky to think about – do policy makers think about probabilities?
The smaller the probability gets, the harder it is to think about.
What is the base population we are dealing with? Even though probability might be small, if the base population is
huge, we could be dealing with a lot of people
We might spend all money gathering information and never take any action – important to be reasonable
MONEY AND RISK SUBJECTIVE EXPECTED UTILITY THEORY
The certain monetary equivalent (CME) is the price willing to take for certain, rather than take the gamble
• Assuming I am risk averse, my amount should be less than 50
• If $100 is best and $0 is worst, set U(100) = 1 and U(0) = 0
• Instead of thinking about money, I am going to think about utility
$X and
• so let’s say that for me, somebody would have to pay me $33 to sell gamble
• let’s say the value is $18. We change odds to .75 of getting $100 and .25 of getting zero, so this is a better
gamble. So I should want MORE money than 50 dollars
• Let’s say it’s $59 (just made it up)
• So we can draw…. A UTILITY CURVE FOR MONEY! Figure out how much value people put on money.
The lowest we can get is zero
The highest we can get is one hundred
CME line is utility for money! Certain monetary equivalent
Utility for $50 might be .7 (CME)
Utility for $50 (EMV) is .5
Utility of expected is lower than utility of certain
I get more utility out of things that are certain
Our certain monetary equivalent is LARGER than the expected monetary value… ?
If we start from utility of .5, then CME of ,5 is 33, and EMV is $50, so Risk premium is $17
Risk Premium
Risk Premium: How much money you will have to pay me to take the bet instead of the certain amount.
Risk Profiles
• If CME line < EMV line(bows to left) then you are a risk averse person.
• If CME line = EMV line then Risk neutral
• If CME line > EMV line then risk seeking
* We might not act in a risk averse way if the probability of winning big is really small. If we pay MORE than a
dollar (for .01 chance winning $100) we would pay MORE for that chance.
Someone who was risk averse would have CME line that curves to LEFT of EMV
What we OFTEN see is the picture above. We are willing to take risks when amounts/stakes are low and
probabilities are low, then we become risk averse.
What does it mean in words that the line starts to slope downward? We put less and less value on money the
more we have. So giving tax breaks to rich people – they don’t value it as much if you gave same amount to poor
person.
So we value money less, the more we have. If I have a million in the bank I value it less than someone who has
nothing
U(-1000) = 0
U(500) = 1
We find $100 (for certain) on the Utility curve, on CME line it is .85
So we solve tree again for expected utility, and find that we would rather buy bonds over stock (.85 >.75). Given
our risk profile (AVERSE), this is what we are most comfortable with. What is our risk premium? Go back to curve,
read off different values, and find difference
U(.75) = -$200
U(.85) = $100
• Stakes for each government decision are relatively small for the government
• Exception: war, social security
• When should governments accept risk aversion of citizens?
• When should governments act risk neutral?
• Are governments risk averse?
o Are politicians risk averse, are bureaucrats risk averse?
• Zambia government didn’t want to take genetically modified grain. If they introduced them into their
market, the European Union (which bans the grain) would say in the future “we don’t want to trade with
you, you are risky to us”
o So EU and US had different attitudes regarding risk… Europeans are MUCH more risk averse
regarding food. We
o We have people who are dying TODAY but if we accept food we are in danger of breaking ties
with EU in future
• Stakes are high in most government decision making
• Government is playing with taxpayers money, so should take that attitude, so we’re risk averse so we
should be that way
• We might need to be risk loving in certain situations, for moral reasons, etc.
• If we are going to die, we might be risk loving. (present is more important than future)
• GOVERNMENTS are making lots and lots of decisions, so they are going to win some and lose some. They
are more like Bill Gates… has a lot of money to play with, and do it again and again, so governments
mostly are risk neutral.
David Stockman
So David Stockman has to CUT 40 billion dollars/700 billion (total budget size) 4-5%
The problem is that we can’t touch…
• 350 is social security
• 150 is defense
So we are left with 200 billion – a lot of which are interest on debt
Then article comes out. And he’s reprimanded, deficits spiral out of control in 1980’s,
You CAN’T cut taxes and increase defense spending by an enormous amount
Politics
1. Problem Recognition
• Agendas
o How does something get on a political agenda?
• When and how does the policy process recognize problems?
o Not = “real” problem
• Example: AIDS
o When recognized – called GRID
o How characterized – nation didn’t realize anyone could become victim until heterosexual got
from blood transfusion
2. Options Identification
• what options does the policy process consider?
• Politics limits options
• Examples
o Drugs: Legalization not considered
o AIDS: needle exchanges often not considered
• Relationship to problem identification
3. Policy Choice
• What policies does the policy process choose?
• We don’t often choose the “best” policy
• Policy is a political outcome
• Example: The Crime Bill
o 3 strikes and you’re out
o More prisons
o More police
o No “midnight basketball” it might have worked, but we couldn’t sell it
4. implementation
5. Effect
Players
• trial lawyers
o didn’t want malpractice reform
• Dingell: Chairman of energy and commerce
o Favored
• Business roundtable
o Small businesses: didn’t favor, opposed because can’t afford extra cost
o Big businesses: originally in favor bill promised to cut some costs
But ultimately OPPOSED because promises of cuts of spending weren’t followed through
on
• Newt Gingrich and Dole: house min whip
o Strongly opposed: late in game blocked negotiations on GATT
• Boggs: lobbyist working for opposition, representing trial lawyers, malpractice reform, wants to make sure
that malpractice part taken care of
• Hillary Clinton: Task force
o FOR!
• HIAA
o Opposed – run Harry and Louise AD: sit around kitchen table talking about HC… slogan was “they
choose, we lose”
• uninsured Americans (poor), unions, senior citizens
o FAVOR
• drug companies
o OPPOSED – worried about government control over them
• Ira Magaziner: Chairing tax force with Hillary, brainpower behind entire thing
o FAVOR
• Doctors
o American Medical Association: didn’t want small doc offices
• Media
o Neither for or against, but key player
House: 258 dem 178 Rep
57 Dem 43 Rep
Political Bargaining
Basic Orientation
Players
Issues
• dimensions of possible outcomes
• Altruistic interests
o Concern for others
o Idealism
• preferences are stable and transparent and accessible
• We assume that people’s basic interests don’t change
Sources of Power
• Better alternatives
o Ability to improve own or worsen others alternatives
o Ability to change the game
• Allies
o Who are our allies?
• Skill
• Candidate elections
o Predicts race to the middle for two parties
o
o Primaries? Three parties?
• Policy proposals (eg health care)
• Implication: centrist outcomes close to median voter’s ideal
• HC reform didn’t work well because was such a large step at one time… we learned we have to take more
gradual steps!
• Players
o Politicians
o Interest groups
• Issue:
o Usually one dimensional
• Interests
o Politicians want to be re-elected
o Interest groups wants legislation
• Rules
o Informal: politicians trade votes for contributions
o Formal: time to pass legislation, frequency of election, committee members, campaign finance
law.
Bigger interest group has most power, realize nothing will happen if they don’t step in, so then maybe two more
groups step in to push for legislation, but then last two (smallest?) groups freeride! Only very big interest groups
put out a lot of money, and smaller ones free ride, so interest groups have problems.
BENEFITS
COSTS
Diffuse Concentrated
Diffuse
Most likelihood of passing?
Easier than when benefits are
diffuse because there are
fewer ppl so strongly for legis.
Concentrated
Example: Campaign Finance
What motivates voters to be informed and make decisions may not be as obvious as we think… does that make us
rational? I make choice to gather as much information as I deem necessary to make decisions
Theory of rational ignorance: it’s rational for me to not invest enough time to know everything
We elect people to know everything for us, we pay for information, pay for others to sort information, we latch
onto people that we think have similar views to ourselves and free ride on them. – we use heuristics. When we
think of these models, we have to think of how voters assess/evaluate all of this. We make assumptions about
people being rational and informed, but it all depends
Policy predictions
• Cost benefit analysis
o We should expect policies to pass that are social surplus enhancing projects – use resources on
ones that grow pie the most!
• median voter model
o no, that isn’t what is going to happen! We have centrist policy, people go towards center so we
have incremental policy
• Pressure group model
o No! neither of those! Projects more likely to benefit few at the small expense of many. How
concentrated are the costs and benefits?
Symbolic Politics
• how do all of these things interact with our policy and political analysis?
• Central perspective we take: Politics is like a theater
• Key Assumptions
o About human nature
o About political phenomena
Human Nature
• Rationally ignorant: important to remember because we would be fully informed, harder to get caught up
with symbols
• Symbol users: evoke whole system of beliefs, a viewpoint,
• Reality constructors
o Perception
o Memory
o Beliefs
• people are constructors of their own reality, reality is what we make of it
• movie with four people watching murder
o they all have different accounts of murder!
• meaning and identify seekers
o we actively try to connect the dots, try to make sense of things
• Story tellers: we try to tell stories in a way that is convincing
Social Behavior
• symbols are socially constructed things
• hammer/sythe: workers, under communism
• red cross and red crescent:
• flag of gay movement: symbolizes acceptance of diversity, we’re all different, but we’re all part of the
rainbow
• shared stories, myths
What’s a Story? The Structure of Narrative
• Plot:
o Linear: beginning, middle, end
o Something happens
• Bipolar symbolic landscape: good and evil, oversimplifying the truth, we have heroes and villains
• Protagonists
o Heroes
o Villains
o We MAKE people into heroes and villains
o Under the new deal, welfare etc was thought of something GOOD that was going to assist
victims… it wasn’t a program in the sense it was thought of in the 70’s and 80’s – when welfare
recipients were stigmatized… they were VICTIMS
• dramatic tension
Plot Forms
• Falling action = tragedy… the nightly news!
• Rising action = OJ simpson story, here he comes, he rises up becomes fantastic, and then screws up!
• Rising Action = comedy or epic
Political Stories
• Political stories “frame” issues
o What angle are we showing it from? What do we allow into the frame?
o Framing can allow people to IDENTIFY with something and motivate political action!
o We want people to think I CAN RELATE! I’m part of it!
o Examples
Bosnia: Vietnam or Holocaust?
“Tax relief”, “Partial Birth Abortion” “Death Tax” “Marriage Penalty” “war on terrorism”
Framing
• Textual Analysis
o Actors
o Symbolic landscape – what are the symbols?
o Narrative structure – what is the structure of this story?
o Meaning – what is the larger meaning?
• Explanation
o Prediction
o Prescription: spinning, reframing
MOVIE!
What are the symbols? The narrative? Use of story? Perspective/framing these issues
Actors
½ dallas county citizens black, less than 1% registered by 1965 – few blacks that lined up got in, and getting in
doesn’t equal registration
President Johnson: eliminate every remaining obstacle to the right and the opportunity to vote
Katzenbah:
Arrested Amelia Boynton: teachers marched to court house in protest, knowing could be fired.
The power of public demonstration, sheer number of people
Reverend Vivian confronted sheriff Jim Clark and deputies on court house steps – I am rep ppl in Dallas county and
I have the right to do so… am I saying the truth? (had crowd behind him) This is a national problem… with Jim
Clark it was a clear, physical engagement there is effort to get cameras away
Must take a responsibility for everything… gesticulated with fist to show power. It’s time for us to say to (gov
officials etc) we will have no alternative other than to engage in broader and more drastic forms of civil
disobedience to bring attention of nation to this in Selma Alabama!
Death of Jimmy Jackson, protecting mother from attack: mourning him was a symbol, created movement…
Can’t protect lives of own citizens seeking right to vote, but can spend all this money in Vietnam
MARCH Have to give people honorable context to eliminate grief… otherwise break down in violence and chaos…
as a response proposed symbol march 54 miles salma to capital Montgomery
After beating on bridge… knew wouldn’t send in national guard, sent out call to ppl good will
People came to salma from all over country, clergymen black and white
• We are here to share with ppl of salma with struggle for right to vote… seen violence on TV< here to share
it with you. MEDIA IMPORTANT
• Change in atmosphere, spirit of inspiration, motivation, hope!
• Planned to march Tuesday, Johnson wanted to wait until assured would be no violence,
o Other Frank Johnson banned march
o King never violated federal order, but was pressure to march
o SCLC left decision to march to King… didn’t want him to back down
o Private disagreement and public unity!
o Announcement made that march Tuesday would go forward
o But king told Johnson would call off march… met with King to stress importance of him keeping
his word to ppl that march would go forward… HONESTY in image is important
Tuesday March 9 2000 set out to cross bridge… this times with politicians, members SNCC, southern whites… side
by side with those beaten
Marchers asked to kneel and pray
Rev Ralph Abernathy: Dr King turned marchers around and walked across bridge… wasn’t much else to do… would
have gotten beat up if ran into police line. Sense of confusion… King asked people to stay few more days…
• James Reeb died from blow to head passing night café – marchers mourned him
• News of attack provoke national upcry in many cities, protests and marches.
EQUALITY FREEDOM
Angry that death of white minister stirred nation moreso than death jimmy lee Jackson… nation SHOULD be upset
when anyone is killed, why did it take a white person?
Protecting marchers became issue for President Johnson and governor Wallace – send troops to maintain orders…
the two met in Washington… president Johnson asked if wanted to be remembered as petty men or great men…
Wallace like a rubber band, hoped that Wallace would give press statement determining determination to protect
marchers from Johnson… act like responsible governor!
Hopeful can have solution to problem… did make suggestions… Governor Wallace refused to pay for
protecting marchers. Johnson sensed mood of country and addressed congress…
• 8 days after bloody Sunday, president asked for voting rights bill, used words of movement… their cause
must be our cause too… its all of us who must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and justice, and
we shall overcome.
o Everyone cheers, tear ran down cheek, VICTORY – affirmation of the movement.
Now is the time to… transform Alabama, make justice a reality, etc…
Interviewed people at march…
SCLC heard of plot against King’s life, but King refused to leave march… everyone in blue suit lined up with MLK,
and to this day don’t know why were up there!
Civil rights movement never be same again, it was coming to an end.
KNOW ALL terms in the glossary… think about how each term fits in the course
NAFTA
Issues
Large sucking sound (jobs going out of US) – (Ross Perot) JOBS
ENVIRONMENT
Regulatory Environment
Pat Buchanan
Ross Perot
Unions
Greenpeace
Different Stories…
Unions: human rights, corporate aid, helping corporations at expense of workers, workers are pawns that are
being sacrificed.. creating image of downward spiral going on for some time, goes against American dream
Grassroots(Greenpeace): NAFTA could be good for environment because make way to impose environmental
requirements on all these countries. Greenpeace take out advertisement in newspapers, message is “kills
dolphins” Long time agenda that organization already head, just now linking onto NAFTA.
Ross Perot: Ran in election, trying to survive as a political player. Paints pictures of American workers become
poor (like Mexican workers?) Said that we are going to converge into Mexico… and type of life. SCARE TACTIC
Pat Buchanan: American independence, constitution, statue of liberty is ALL being threatened! Globalization is
going to suck up/obliterate what the US stands for (values) We are going to become a subsidiary of the global
order. Ship that carriers in its cargo the virus of globalization
Facing lopsided congress, few people committed, a lot of people against, have to win ALL undecided…
even the Democrats aren’t all on board!
In Congress: Clinton speaks to each Congressman individually and talks to them until he convinces them… makes
phone calls to all undecided people. Senator Bill Bradley goes to House and talks with all of reps… at first their
message is “just hold off on your commitments – stop the bleeding” don’t choose sides yet! Hold off! Give us some
time!
Industries (side deals): Particular industry group very unhappy with this deal – SUGAR industry… NAFTA could
enable to flood American market with cheap sugar, sugar businesses in America go out of business. Redefine
“sugar” in the agreement. Basically making deals on the margins, increasing some of the ZOPAS. (industry groups
pressure congressmen, congressmen support)
There are a lot of tools, strategies that we learned, it isn’t just ONE that provides insight into an issue. We have to
use a whole package of tools together!
Answer ? why we need public policy – give us rationale for when government action is needed and non needed,
also give us analytical and communication skills