Individuals Economize and Respond Predictably to
Principle 4: People Respond To Incentives
Because people make decisions by comparing costs and benefits, their behavior may change when the costs or benefits modify. That is, people respond to incentives. When the cost of an apple rises, for instance, people determine to eat more pears and fewer apples, because the price of ownership an apple is higher. At the same time, apple tree orchards decide to hire more workers and harvest more than apples, because the benefit of selling an apple is also college. As nosotros will encounter, the effect of toll on the behavior of buyers and sellers in a market place—in this case, the market for apples—is crucial for understanding how the economic system works.
Public policymakers should never forget almost incentives, for many policies change the costs or benefits that people confront and, therefore, alter behavior. A revenue enhancement on gasoline, for instance, encourages people to bulldoze smaller, more than fuel-efficient cars. It also encourages people to take public transportation rather than bulldoze and to live closer to where they work. If the taxation were large plenty, people would first driving electric cars.
When policymakers fail to consider how their policies affect incentives, they can end upward with results that they did not intend. For example, consider public policy regarding auto rubber. Today all cars have seat belts, simply that was not true 40 years ago. In the late 1960s, Ralph Nader’southward book Unsafe at Any Speed generated much public concern over car rubber. Congress responded with laws requiring car companies to make various safety features, including seat belts, standard equipment on all new cars.
How does a seat belt constabulary touch automobile safety? The straight effect is obvious. With seat belts in all cars, more people wear seat belts, and the probability of surviving a major motorcar blow rises. In this sense, seat belts save lives.
Just that’southward not the end of the story. To fully empathize the furnishings of this law, nosotros must recognize that people change their behavior in response to the incentives they face. The relevant behavior here is the speed and care with which drivers operate their cars. Driving slowly and carefully is plush because it uses the driver’s time and free energy. When deciding how safely to drive, rational people compare the marginal benefit from safer driving to the marginal cost. They drive more slowly and carefully when the benefit of increased safety is high. This explains why people drive more slowly and carefully when roads are icy than when roads are clear.
Now consider how a seat chugalug law alters the cost-benefit calculation of a rational driver. Seat belts brand accidents less plush for a driver because they reduce the probability of injury or death. Thus, a seat belt law reduces the benefits to tiresome and conscientious driving. People respond to seat belts as they would to an improvement in route conditions—by faster and less conscientious driving. The terminate result of a seat chugalug law, therefore, is a larger number of accidents.
Basketball star Kobe Bryant understands opportunity cost and incentives. Despite good high school grades and SAT scores, he decided to skip college and go straight to the NBA, where he earned about $10 million over four years.
How does the police force affect the number of deaths from driving? Drivers who wear their seat belts are more likely to survive whatever given accident, but they are also more likely to notice themselves in an accident. The cyberspace effect is ambiguous. Moreover, the reduction in condom driving has an agin touch on pedestrians (and on drivers who do not wearable their seat belts). They are put in jeopardy by the police because they are more likely to find themselves in an accident but are not protected by a seat belt. Thus, a seat belt constabulary tends to increment the number of pedestrian deaths.
At commencement, this give-and-take of incentives and seat belts might seem similar idle speculation. Yet, in a 1975 written report, economist Sam Peltzman showed that the auto-safety laws have, in fact, had many of these effects. According to Peltzman’s evidence, these laws produce both fewer deaths per accident and more accidents. The net result is little change in the number of driver deaths and an increase in the number of pedestrian deaths.
Peltzman’s analysis of car safety is an example of the general principle that people respond to incentives. Many incentives that economists study are more than straightforward than those of the auto-safety laws. No one is surprised that people drive smaller cars in Europe, where gasoline taxes are high, than in the United States, where gasoline taxes are low. Still, as the seat belt example shows, policies can have effects that are not obvious in accelerate. When analyzing any policy, we must consider non simply the direct effects but as well the indirect effects that work through incentives. If the policy changes incentives, it will cause people to modify their behavior.
I QUICK QUIZ: List and briefly explicate the four principles of individual decisionmaking.
The first iv principles discussed how individuals brand decisions. As we go about our lives, many of our decisions impact non only ourselves but other people besides. The next three principles concern how people interact with one another.
Keep reading here: Principle 5 Trade Tin Brand Anybody Better
Was this article helpful?
Individuals Economize and Respond Predictably to