In Singapore context, childhood immunisation covers children from time of birth to an age of 12. During that period, a child would have received more than 20 shots of a variety of vaccines to immunize him/her against a multitude of infectious diseases which include tuberculosis, hepatitis B and measles. This has resulted in the dramatic reduction in the incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases in the younger population.
Childhood immunisation (CI) is a merit good, in other words, a socially desirable good. CI is considered a ‘private good’ which have the characteristics of being rival and excludable. It is only made available to those who are willing to pay for the good and if the demand is high, others may not get to enjoy it.
However, positive externalities occur when we consume CI. For example: A person who goes for immunization positively affects those around him because there is one less possible carrier of that particular disease. Since consumption of CI is socially benefiting, the government had to make certain vaccinations compulsory for all children. In their view, if individuals were left alone to make decisions, such a merit good will be produced and consumed at sub-optimal amounts. Therefore, they need to intervene to encourage increased consumption of CI.
The government intervenes by providing subsidies so that more people can afford for CI. The subsidy will serve to correct the misallocation of resources arising form positive externalities since it can be easily implemented to increase production and consumption. However, this will require increased government expenditure. This financial burden will be brought over to working Singaporeans who will have to pay higher tax rates. Therefore it will be translated to a higher cost of living.
In conclusion, childhood immunization is an example of a market failure where there the market mechanism fails to supply at a socially efficient level since demand is ever-changing. This is because it is up to the consumer to decide how much he is willing and able to pay for the benefits he is receiving and it can vary. Also, we need to consider the presence of unequal distribution income, thus causing some groups of households being deprived of such a merit good.
Credits: Tan Chin Chuen, Kenneth Wong, Wang Enshng and Mark Lui
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
but if demand for immunisation were to increase, wouldnt suppliers want to supply more of that good?
yanling.
the group has shown sufficient evidence that childhood immunisation is a merit good and why the government gives subsidies to encourage people to consume the good.
isnt childhood immunisation compulsary for all primary school goers and taking into consideration that primary school education is mandatory for all singapore citizens. in that case, CI would be a public good, non-exclusive in that all primary school goers receive it non-dependent of their background.
hence i cant much agree with your statement that it is a private good.
reuben chan sc6
ya , i thought that CI is compulsory regardless of whether you can afford it a not. in that case, it won't be a private good but instead, a public good which is non-rival as everyone get to have a go at the jab.
adeline.
Post a Comment