{"title":"Foundations, Market Failures and the Funding of New Music","authors":"ERIC DROTT","doi":"10.1017/rma.2021.26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 1965, a short article entitled ‘On the Performing Arts: An Anatomy of their Economic Problems’ appeared in the American Economic Review, the flagship journal of the American Economic Association.<span>1</span> Written by two Princeton-affiliated economists, William J. Baumol and William G. Bowen, the article laid out in eight short pages a powerful explanation for why the operating costs of so many performing arts organizations consistently overran their earnings, and why this tendency had become more pronounced over time. The problem was not that lavish budgets were being spent on productions, nor that musicians’ unions had wrung too many concessions from management. Rather, the problem was more prosaic, having to do with ‘differential rates of growth in the economy’.<span>2</span> To illustrate the argument, Baumol and Bowen asked readers to perform a thought experiment: ‘Think of an economy divided into two sectors: one in which productivity is rising and another where productivity is stable.’<span>3</span> For the sake of simplicity, they explicitly assumed a number of useful fictions: that labour can easily and frictionlessly move between the two sectors; that wage increases across the board will keep pace with productivity growth (a standard if problematic assumption in modern economic theory);<span>4</span> and that the monetary supply is sufficiently controlled to maintain overall price stability. What, given these assumptions, is the outcome of such a stark split in the economy? In the productive sector, the increase in wages that workers receive will be offset by increased productivity. In the stagnant sector, wages will rise but output will not. And if an organization is to avoid bankruptcy, the only way to do so is by raising prices to cover the rise in labour costs. (Remember, one of Baumol and Bowen’s working assumptions is that wage increases will keep pace with productivity growth, in both productive and stagnant sectors.) Yet this solution to the problem creates another one, since over time prices in the unproductive sector will increase at a much faster rate than those in the productive one, making the products of the former unaffordable to an increasing number of workers.</p>","PeriodicalId":17438,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Musical Association","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Musical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rma.2021.26","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MUSIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In 1965, a short article entitled ‘On the Performing Arts: An Anatomy of their Economic Problems’ appeared in the American Economic Review, the flagship journal of the American Economic Association.1 Written by two Princeton-affiliated economists, William J. Baumol and William G. Bowen, the article laid out in eight short pages a powerful explanation for why the operating costs of so many performing arts organizations consistently overran their earnings, and why this tendency had become more pronounced over time. The problem was not that lavish budgets were being spent on productions, nor that musicians’ unions had wrung too many concessions from management. Rather, the problem was more prosaic, having to do with ‘differential rates of growth in the economy’.2 To illustrate the argument, Baumol and Bowen asked readers to perform a thought experiment: ‘Think of an economy divided into two sectors: one in which productivity is rising and another where productivity is stable.’3 For the sake of simplicity, they explicitly assumed a number of useful fictions: that labour can easily and frictionlessly move between the two sectors; that wage increases across the board will keep pace with productivity growth (a standard if problematic assumption in modern economic theory);4 and that the monetary supply is sufficiently controlled to maintain overall price stability. What, given these assumptions, is the outcome of such a stark split in the economy? In the productive sector, the increase in wages that workers receive will be offset by increased productivity. In the stagnant sector, wages will rise but output will not. And if an organization is to avoid bankruptcy, the only way to do so is by raising prices to cover the rise in labour costs. (Remember, one of Baumol and Bowen’s working assumptions is that wage increases will keep pace with productivity growth, in both productive and stagnant sectors.) Yet this solution to the problem creates another one, since over time prices in the unproductive sector will increase at a much faster rate than those in the productive one, making the products of the former unaffordable to an increasing number of workers.
1965年,一篇题为《论表演艺术》的短文:这篇文章由普林斯顿大学的两位经济学家William J. Baumol和William G. Bowen撰写,在短短八页的文章中有力地解释了为什么这么多表演艺术组织的运营成本总是超过他们的收入,以及为什么这种趋势随着时间的推移变得越来越明显。问题不在于在制作上花费了过多的预算,也不在于音乐家工会从管理层那里榨取了太多的让步。相反,这个问题更为平淡无奇,与“经济增长率的差异”有关为了说明这一观点,鲍莫尔和鲍恩请读者做了一个思维实验:“想象一个经济体被分为两个部门:一个部门的生产率在上升,另一个部门的生产率保持稳定。”为了简单起见,他们明确假设了一些有用的虚构:劳动力可以在两个部门之间轻松无摩擦地流动;工资的全面增长将与生产率的增长保持同步(这是现代经济理论中一个标准但有问题的假设);货币供应得到充分控制,以保持总体价格稳定。考虑到这些假设,经济如此严重分裂的结果是什么?在生产部门,工人工资的增加将被生产率的提高所抵消。在停滞的行业,工资会上涨,但产出不会。如果一个组织想要避免破产,唯一的办法就是通过提高价格来弥补劳动力成本的上涨。(请记住,鲍莫尔和鲍恩的一个有效假设是,无论是在生产性部门还是停滞不前的部门,工资增长都将与生产率增长保持同步。)然而,这个问题的解决方案会产生另一个问题,因为随着时间的推移,非生产性部门的价格将以比生产性部门快得多的速度上涨,使越来越多的工人负担不起前者的产品。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the Royal Musical Association was established in 1986 (replacing the Association"s Proceedings) and is now one of the major international refereed journals in its field. Its editorial policy is to publish outstanding articles in fields ranging from historical and critical musicology to theory and analysis, ethnomusicology, and popular music studies. The journal works to disseminate knowledge across the discipline and communicate specialist perspectives to a broad readership, while maintaining the highest scholarly standards.