tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1331441403058020963.post414915757305668199..comments2024-03-28T06:49:24.930-04:00Comments on International Political Economy at the University of North Carolina: Negative Externalities and the Tragedy of the CommonsThomas Oatleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14092437150746625670noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1331441403058020963.post-66215536087357233482017-05-01T13:39:40.941-04:002017-05-01T13:39:40.941-04:00I wanted to point out, in response to Thomas Oatle...I wanted to point out, in response to Thomas Oatley's question ("Who is it that usually equates externalities and ToCs?"), that there is an abundance of references that connect these concepts. If you require a property right to have a clear cut example of an externality every time, you'd practically have to rewrite every textbook example of negative and positive externalities (e.g. barking dogs, car exhaust, vaccinations, building restoration, "business stealing"), etc.).Camillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01710887532754544896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1331441403058020963.post-38879625084552625452011-08-12T21:08:21.497-04:002011-08-12T21:08:21.497-04:00Thomas, not confused. Perhaps confusing. This post...Thomas, not confused. Perhaps confusing. This post was motivated by a roundtable discussion I was recently a part of that included professors and grad students from several social sciences and philosophy in which we discussed ToC. None of them could grok what I meant when I said it wasn't about externalities. <br /><br />LFC, fine. As I say, climate change per se was not the point of the post. I phrased things weakly so as not to distract from the main point, and also because I know basically nothing about climate science except that the error bars are large. So I don't know what the probability is of Bangladesh being washed into the sea, or any other outcome that gets discussed.Kindred Winecoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14330671232391851377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1331441403058020963.post-58123227437683778222011-08-09T10:09:47.410-04:002011-08-09T10:09:47.410-04:00Climate change "may be a human problem"?...Climate change "<i>may</i> be a human problem"? I think you might want to use a stronger word than "may". The issue is not so much whether Bangladeshis have a "right" to a certain climate level as whether there is a global obligation (rooted in morality not law) to ensure that a sizable part of their country is not eventually washed into the sea.LFChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13551197682770555147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1331441403058020963.post-9163007827541644282011-08-05T08:33:52.434-04:002011-08-05T08:33:52.434-04:00This post is either confusing or confused. ToC are...This post is either confusing or confused. ToC are not externalities for the simple reason that there are no property rights. Negotiations over climate change are difficult precisely because they are negotiations over property right assignment. Who has the right--polluters or pollutee? The distributional consequences arising from internalization will be determined largely by that initial assignment. Who is it that usually equates externalities and ToCs? This is, as you point out, wrong.<br /><br />I really don't get your last point at all. You are saying that the concerns about the distributional consequences should trump the concern about aggregate social welfare?cThomas Oatleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14092437150746625670noreply@blogger.com