In public choice theory and welfare economics, a government failure is the creation of economic inefficiency by government intervention; a situation in which government action in the economy yields a worse allocation of resources than an available alternative. It is the analytical counterpart to market failure: as markets fail to allocate resources efficiently, government action intended to correct them may itself fall short. A government failure occurs when costs of an intervention outweigh its benefits, leaving society worse off that it would be under a different policy, or none at all. Like market failure, government failure does not refer to the absence of a preferred outcome, but to the prevention of an efficient one, and can arise even where an efficient market solution was available. It is defined by inefficiency, rather than distribution: creating winners and losers doesn't by itself is a government failure. The defining feature of a government failure is the availability of an unrealised Pareto improvement—a change that could make everyone better off in a different arrangement. Government may intervene by provision, taxation or subsidy, and regulation; and a government failure can arise from any of these. Such failure could be either on the demand side or on the supply side. Demand-side failures include preference-revelation problems and the illogic of voting and collective behaviour. Supply-side failures largely result from principal–agent problem. Frequently cited mechanisms and instances of government failure include regulatory capture and regulatory arbitrage, the unintended consequences of an intervention, and cases where an inefficient outcome is more feasible politically than the Pareto improvement to it.
History The phrase "government failure" emerged as a term of art in the early 1960s with the rise of intellectual and political criticism of government regulations. Building on the premise that the only legitimate rationale for government regulation was market failure, some economists in public choice developed new theories of how governments can make costly, failure-prone, or ill-advised interventions into markets, creating worse outcomes than the market failure itself. An early use of "government failure" was by Ronald Coase (1964) in comparing an actual and ideal system of industrial regulation:
"Contemplation of an optimal system may provide techniques of analysis that would otherwise have been missed and, in certain special cases, it may go far to providing a solution. But in general its influence has been pernicious. It has directed economists’ attention away from the main question, which is how alternative arrangements will actually work in practice. It has led economists to derive conclusions for economic policy from a study of an abstract of a market situation. It is no accident that in the literature...we find a category "market failure" but no category "government failure." Until we realize that we are choosing between social arrangements which are all more or less failures, we are not likely to make much headway." Roland McKean used the term in 1965 to suggest limitations on an invisible-hand notion of government behavior. More formal and general analysis followed in such areas as development economics, ecological economics, political science, political economy, public choice theory, and transaction-cost economics. Later, due to the popularity of public choice theory in 1970s, government failure attracted the attention of the academic community.
Causes of government failure
Imperfect information While a perfectly informed government might make an effort to reach the social equilibrium via quality, quantity, price or market structure regulation, it is difficult for the government to obtain necessary information (such as production costs) to make right decisions. This absence may then result in flawed quantity regulation when either too much or too little of the good or service is produced, subsequently creating either excess supply or excess demand. Imperfect information can come in many forms including; Uncertainty, Vagueness, Incompleteness and impreciseness. All creating flaws in government policy's and therefore in turn creating inefficiencies within the economy.
Political interference Political decisions may be made for short-term gain in response to interference by special interest groups. Interference can lead to market failures.
Political self-interest The self-interests of a politician may undermine fair governance. This could look like an inappropriate allocation of funds or time. Public funds could be pushed to influence voters or time could be allocated to pursue personal inequalities instead of actual market failures. When politicians prioritize their self-interests over their constituents' needs, they risk alienating the very voters who supported them. This erosion of public trust not only diminishes their popularity but also undermines the effectiveness of governance. Ultimately, such self-serving behavior detracts from addressing critical societal issues, leaving citizens disillusioned and the country vulnerable.
Policy myopia Another cause of the government failure, as many critics of government intervention claim, is that politicians tend to look for short term fixes with instant and visible results that do not have to last, to difficult economic problems rather than making thorough analysis for solving long-term solutions.
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.
