Anti-rival good: Difference between revisions
Added Category: goods |
Added a para about network effects, prompted by email conversation with von Hippel |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
An anti-rival good meets the test of a [[public good]] because it is non-excludable (freely available to all) and non-rival (consumption by one person does not reduce the amount available for others). However it has the additional quality of being created by private individuals for common benefit without being motivated by pure [[altruism]] (because the individual contributor receives benefits from the contributions of others). The term also invokes [[Reciprocity (cultural anthropology)]] and the concept of a [[gift economy]]. See also [[Private good]]. |
An anti-rival good meets the test of a [[public good]] because it is non-excludable (freely available to all) and non-rival (consumption by one person does not reduce the amount available for others). However it has the additional quality of being created by private individuals for common benefit without being motivated by pure [[altruism]] (because the individual contributor receives benefits from the contributions of others). The term also invokes [[Reciprocity (cultural anthropology)]] and the concept of a [[gift economy]]. See also [[Private good]]. |
||
A wikipedia entry is an example of an anti-rival good. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
The production of anti-rival goods appears to benefit from the [[network effect]]. Leung (2006) offers this quote from Weber (2004): |
|||
<blockquote> |
|||
Under conditions of anti-rivalness, as the size of the Internet-connected group increases, and there is a heterogeneous distribution of motivations with people who have a high level of interest and some resources to invest, then the large group is more likely, all things being equal, to provide the good than is a small group. |
|||
</blockquote> |
|||
| ⚫ | Although the term "anti-rival good" is a neologism, this category of goods may be neither new nor specific to the internet era. According to Lessig, a particular language also meets the criteria; "Language is an anti-rival good: not only does your speaking English not restrict me, your speaking it benefits me. The more people who speak a language, the more useful that language is... to those who speak it." |
||
| Line 15: | Line 22: | ||
*{{Harvard reference | Surname1=von Hippel | Given1=E. | Title=Democratizing Innovation | Publisher=The MIT Press | Year=2005 | ID=ISBN 0262002744}}. |
*{{Harvard reference | Surname1=von Hippel | Given1=E. | Title=Democratizing Innovation | Publisher=The MIT Press | Year=2005 | ID=ISBN 0262002744}}. |
||
*{{Harvard reference | Surname1=Weber| Given1=S. | Title=The Success of Open Source | Publisher=Harvard University Press | Year=2004 | ID=ISBN 0674012925}}. |
*{{Harvard reference | Surname1=Weber| Given1=S. | Title=The Success of Open Source | Publisher=Harvard University Press | Year=2004 | ID=ISBN 0674012925}}. |
||
*{{cite web | author=Leung, T. | title=The Success of Open Source (review) | work=www.sauria.com | http://www.sauria.com/blog/2006/06/04 | accessdate=November 15 | accessyear=2006}} |
|||
[[Category:Goods]] |
[[Category:Goods]] |
||
Revision as of 21:22, 14 November 2006
This term is a neologism, coined to describe goods created by a process of reciprocal exchange for mutual benefit, such as open source software.
Anti-rival goods can be clearly from distinguished from public goods, as explained by Lawrence Lessig:
It's not just that code is non-rival; it's that code in particular, and (at least some) knowledge in general, is, as Weber calls it, 'anti-rival'. I am not only not harmed when you share an anti-rival good: I benefit.
An anti-rival good meets the test of a public good because it is non-excludable (freely available to all) and non-rival (consumption by one person does not reduce the amount available for others). However it has the additional quality of being created by private individuals for common benefit without being motivated by pure altruism (because the individual contributor receives benefits from the contributions of others). The term also invokes Reciprocity (cultural anthropology) and the concept of a gift economy. See also Private good.
A wikipedia entry is an example of an anti-rival good.
The production of anti-rival goods appears to benefit from the network effect. Leung (2006) offers this quote from Weber (2004):
Under conditions of anti-rivalness, as the size of the Internet-connected group increases, and there is a heterogeneous distribution of motivations with people who have a high level of interest and some resources to invest, then the large group is more likely, all things being equal, to provide the good than is a small group.
Although the term "anti-rival good" is a neologism, this category of goods may be neither new nor specific to the internet era. According to Lessig, a particular language also meets the criteria; "Language is an anti-rival good: not only does your speaking English not restrict me, your speaking it benefits me. The more people who speak a language, the more useful that language is... to those who speak it."
References and further reading
- Lessig, L. "Do You Floss?". London Review of Books. Retrieved November 14.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=ignored (|access-date=suggested) (help) - Template:Harvard reference.
- Template:Harvard reference.
- Leung, T. "The Success of Open Source (review)". www.sauria.com.
{{cite web}}:|access-date=requires|url=(help); Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); Missing or empty|url=(help); Text "http://www.sauria.com/blog/2006/06/04" ignored (help)