An economic analysis of the philosophical common good

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyze economically several versions of the philosophical common good in order to contribute to the search for a viable conceptualization of the common good. Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents an economic analysis of the common good by examining the extent to which eight different versions of the philosophical concept possess the consumption characteristics of excludability and rivalry – and thus how each version may be classified as an economic good: private, public, common, or club. Findings – One of the examined versions of the philosophical common good is an economic common good; three versions are club goods; and four versions are public goods. Only those versions of the common good that are classifiable as public goods merit consideration as adequate conceptualizations in political and philosophical thought. In assessing the admissible versions the authors conclude that a viable conceptualization of the common good may simply be the maintenance of a peaceful social order that allows people to pursue their individual and collective goals in community. Originality/value – The paper shows that an analysis of the philosophical common good using the economic criteria of excludability and rivalry can contribute to common good discourse.

Lay People Representations on the Common Good and Its Financial Provision

“…In the economic literature, instead, the "common good" has generally been distinguished from the "public good." In neoclassical economics, public goods are generally characterized by their non-excludability (i.e., a person's consumption cannot practically be excluded) and non-rivalry (i.e., a person's consumption does not reduce the benefits of someone else's consumption of the good) in their consumption (Murphy & Parkey, 2016;Musgrave, 1969;Samuelson, 1969). Common goods, instead, have been defined as rival and non-excludable (Hardin, 1968;Ostrom, 1990).…”

Public Goods Bukankah Untuk Rakyat?

“…Di sisi lain, barang publik juga secara khusus harus dikelola oleh negara dan tidak bisa diserahkan kepada swasta (extreme public good) secara penuh. b. Barang semi publik atau milik bersama (common goods) Common Goods merupakan sebuah konsep keadilan, dan sekarang menjadi wacana politik philosopis (Murphy & Parkey, 2016;Vazquez & Gonzalez, 2016 | 48 maka jumlah hasil hutan akan berkurang sehingga orang tidak memiliki kesempatan untuk menghirup udara segar karena hutan penyangga iklim yang dapat menghasilkan udara segar yang bisa dihirup orang banyak. Kasus ini menggambarkan banyak cara untuk mengambil keuntungan secara pribadi dalam jangka pendek, namun tidak memikirkan keuntungan buat orang lain.…”

The Common Good Provision Scale (CGP): A Tool for Assessing People’s Orientation towards Economic and Social Sustainability

“…Contractualism understood the common good as the demand that equity is prior to utility, while in natural law the common good is what the people strive for socially, and in utilitarianism the common good is seen as public demand that secures for everyone the pursuit of his or her private interests [8]. In the economic literature, the common good has generally been distinguished from the public good in terms of the former being rival (i.e., a person's consumption reduce the benefits of someone else's consumption of the good) and non-excludable (i.e., a person's consumption cannot practically be excluded) [9][10][11]. In psychological research, instead, despite the pivotal role that the construct of the common good plays (e.g., in social dilemmas and prosocial behavior research), the construct itself and what it entails remains a relatively unexplored area.…”