Government Failure vs. Market Failure: Principles of Regulation
Government Failure vs. Market Failure: Principles of Regulation
复制标题
政府失灵与市场失灵：监管原则
DOI：
10.1017/cbo9780511657504.002
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Joseph Stiglitz
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Joseph Stiglitz
监管一直是最具争议性的话题之一，批评者认为监管会干扰市场效率，而支持者则认为精心设计的监管不仅可以提高市场效率，还有助于确保市场结果更加公平。随着经济陷入衰退，在本章付印时，已有超过 300 万美国人失去了家园，而且还有数百万人可能会失去家园（除非政府干预得比现在更成功），而且随着政府花费数千亿美元进行救助以防止经济衰退进一步恶化，人们越来越达成共识：政府需要加强监管。就连自由放任经济学的大祭司艾伦·格林斯潘也承认，他相信市场可以自我调节的观点可能太过分了。为了回应这些呼吁 — — 就好像所有的马都跑出去后关上谷仓门一样 — — 美联储收紧了一些监管。如果更好的监管本来可以防止甚至减轻经济衰退，那么这个国家和世界都将为监管不力付出沉重代价。社会成本也同样严重——数十万美国人不仅会失去家园，还会失去一生的积蓄。
The subject of regulation has been one of the most contentious, with critics arguing that regulations interfere with the efficiency of the market, and advocates arguing that well-designed regulations not only make markets more efficient but also help ensure that market outcomes are more equitable. As the economy plunged into a recession, with more than 3 million Americans already having lost their homes as this chapter goes to press and millions more likely to do so (unless the government intervenes more successfully than it has), and as the government spends hundreds of billions in bailouts to prevent the economic recession from growing worse, there is a growing consensus: There was a need for more government regulation. Even the high priest of laissez faire economics, Alan Greenspan, has admitted that he may have gone too far in believing that markets could be self-regulating. Responding to these calls – as if to close the barn door after all the horses have gotten out – the Federal Reserve has tightened some regulations. If it is the case that better regulations could have prevented, or even mitigated, the downturn, the country, and the world, will be paying a heavy price for the failure to regulate adequately. And the social costs are no less grave – as hundreds of thousands of Americans will not only have lost their homes but also their lifetime savings.