Impure Public Goods and the Aggregative Game Approach

  • Anja BrummeEmail author
  • Wolfgang Buchholz
  • Dirk Rübbelke
Part of the Springer Climate book series (SPCL)


Drawing on the example of Cobb–Douglas preferences, we show how the impure public good model can be traced back to the conventional pure public good model. On the one hand, this approach allows applying the aggregative game approach for establishing existence and uniqueness of the Cournot–Nash equilibrium in the voluntary contribution game. On the other hand, differences between the impure and the pure public good model become evident, for instance, the emergence of noncontributors in the Cournot–Nash equilibrium is less likely in the impure public good model. Furthermore, Warr neutrality, i.e., invariance of the Cournot–Nash equilibrium when income is redistributed between contributors, cannot be expected a priori in this model.


Impure public goods Private co-benefits Voluntary provision Aggregative game approach 


  1. Andreoni J (1989) Giving with impure altruism: applications to charity and Ricardian equivalence. J Polit Econ 97:1447–1458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreoni J (1990) Impure altruism and donations to public goods: a theory of warm-glow giving. Econ J 100:464–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andreoni J, McGuire MC (1993) Identifying the free riders: a simple algorithm for determining who will contribute to a public good. J Public Econ 51:447–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boadway R, Pestieau P, Wildasin D (1989) Tax-transfer policies and the voluntary provision of public goods. J Public Econ 39:157–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buchholz W, Cornes R, Peters W (2006) On the frequency of interior Cournot-Nash equilibria in a public good economy. J Public Econ 8:401–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cornes R (2016) Aggregative environmental games. Environ Resour Econ 63:339–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cornes R, Hartley R (2007) Aggregative public good games. J Public Econ 9:201–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cornes R, Sandler T (1994) The comparative static properties of the impure public good model. J Public Econ 54:403–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cornes R, Sandler T (1996) The theory of externalities, public goods and club goods, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guttman JM (1978) Understanding collective action: matching behavior. Am Econ Rev 68:251–255Google Scholar
  11. Kotchen MJ (2005) Impure public goods and the comparative statics of environmentally friendly consumption. J Environ Econ Manag 49:281–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kotchen MJ (2007) Equilibrium existence and uniqueness in impure public good models. Econ Lett 97:91–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rübbelke D (2006) Analysis of an international environmental matching agreement. Environ Econ Policy Stud 8:1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shrestha RK, Cheong KS (2007) An alternative algorithm for identifying free riders based on a no-free-rider Nash equilibrium. FinanzArchiv: Public Financ Anal 63:278–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Warr PG (1983) The private provision of a public good is independent of the distribution of income. Econ Lett 13:207–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Yildirim H (2014) Andreoni-McGuire algorithm and the limits of warm-glow giving. J Public Econ 114:101–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anja Brumme
    • 1
    Email author
  • Wolfgang Buchholz
    • 2
  • Dirk Rübbelke
    • 1
  1. 1.Technische Universität Bergakademie FreibergFreibergGermany
  2. 2.University of RegensburgRegensburgGermany

Personalised recommendations