Better Lucky Than Rich? Welfare Analysis of Automobile License Allocations in Beijing and Shanghai

Shanjun Li
{"title":"Better Lucky Than Rich? Welfare Analysis of Automobile License Allocations in Beijing and Shanghai","authors":"Shanjun Li","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2349865","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Economists often favour market-based mechanisms over non-market based mechanisms to allocate scarce public resources on grounds of economic efficiency and revenue generation. When the usage of the resources in question generates type-dependent negative externalities, the welfare comparison can become ambiguous. Both types of allocation mechanisms are being implemented in China's major cities to distribute limited vehicle licences as a measure to combat worsening traffic congestion and air pollution. While Beijing employs non-transferable lotteries, Shanghai uses an auction system. This article empirically quantifies the welfare consequences of the two mechanisms by taking into account both allocation efficiency and automobile externalities post-allocation. Our analysis shows that different allocation mechanisms lead to dramatic differences in social welfare. Although Beijing's lottery system has a large advantage in reducing automobile externalities over auction, the advantage is offset by the significant allocative cost from misallocation. The lottery system in Beijing resulted in a social welfare loss of 30 billion Yuan (nearly $5 billion) in 2012 alone. A uniform-price auction would have generated nearly 20 billion Yuan to Beijing municipal government, more than covering all its subsidies to the local public transit system.","PeriodicalId":210650,"journal":{"name":"EnergyRN: Transportation (Sub-Topic)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"95","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EnergyRN: Transportation (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2349865","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 95

Abstract

Economists often favour market-based mechanisms over non-market based mechanisms to allocate scarce public resources on grounds of economic efficiency and revenue generation. When the usage of the resources in question generates type-dependent negative externalities, the welfare comparison can become ambiguous. Both types of allocation mechanisms are being implemented in China's major cities to distribute limited vehicle licences as a measure to combat worsening traffic congestion and air pollution. While Beijing employs non-transferable lotteries, Shanghai uses an auction system. This article empirically quantifies the welfare consequences of the two mechanisms by taking into account both allocation efficiency and automobile externalities post-allocation. Our analysis shows that different allocation mechanisms lead to dramatic differences in social welfare. Although Beijing's lottery system has a large advantage in reducing automobile externalities over auction, the advantage is offset by the significant allocative cost from misallocation. The lottery system in Beijing resulted in a social welfare loss of 30 billion Yuan (nearly $5 billion) in 2012 alone. A uniform-price auction would have generated nearly 20 billion Yuan to Beijing municipal government, more than covering all its subsidies to the local public transit system.
幸运比富有好?北京和上海汽车牌照分配的福利分析
出于经济效率和创收的考虑,经济学家往往倾向于以市场为基础的机制,而不是以非市场为基础的机制来分配稀缺的公共资源。当所讨论的资源的使用产生类型依赖的负外部性时,福利比较就会变得模棱两可。这两种分配机制都在中国主要城市实施,以分配有限的车辆牌照,作为应对日益严重的交通拥堵和空气污染的一项措施。北京采用不可转让的彩票制度,而上海采用拍卖制度。本文通过考虑分配效率和分配后的汽车外部性,实证量化了两种机制的福利后果。我们的分析表明,不同的分配机制导致了社会福利的巨大差异。尽管与拍卖相比,北京的摇号制度在减少汽车外部性方面有很大优势,但这种优势被分配不当带来的巨大配置成本所抵消。仅2012年一年,北京的彩票系统就造成了300亿元(近50亿美元)的社会福利损失。统一价格拍卖将为北京市政府带来近200亿元的收入,超过其对当地公共交通系统的所有补贴。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信