THE CONCEPT OF THE PUBLIC GOOD: A VIEW FROM A PHILOSOPHICAL

PHILOSOPHER

Rolando M. Gripaldo
Editor, Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy
The author argues that the concept of the public
good carries largely the politico-ethical sense which
subsumes the politico-economic sense. The public good
is public in the sense that the beneficiaries are the
general public. The government or state pursues it with
a service orientation while private corporations pursue
it with a profit [Link] author also discusses
mixed public goods which are pursued by private
organizations with a service motivation. Government
corporations are basically motivated by service though
having profit is not precluded. Finally, the author talks
about public bads such as corruption, pollution, and
crimes.

INTRODUCTION
I have always viewed philosophy as an activity
consisting of two aspects: (1) clarifying the meaning of
concepts and (2) using these concepts to construct or
reconstruct an integrative view of a philosophical subject or
a synthetic solution to a philosophical problem. Philosophy
as an activity is not simply limited to the analytic
clarification of notions, which in itself is empty unless the
activity of clarification is put into more productive use by solving (or dissolving) a philosophical
issue or by a synthetic integration of those concepts into a
philosophical whole. In short, we undertake the first aspect
because of its extrinsic good (application) and we undertake
the second aspect because of the intrinsic good (clearness of
meaning) of the first. Genuine philosophizing is therefore
both analytic and synthetic, or in an Aristotelian fashion,
both epistemic and phronetic—contrary to some views
which consigns the epistemic aspect to the natural sciences
and only the phronetic aspect to philosophy.

This paper originally wants to pursue the two aspects of

a philosophical activity. However, for lack of time, I will
limit the present paper to the first aspect. I will attempt to
make clear the concept of the public good. I will leave the second aspect to another paper in the
future, that is, which of
the many public goods should be construed at present as the
public good for a Third World country like the Philippines?
THE PUBLIC GOOD FROM
THE POLITICO-ETHICAL SENSE

NATIONAL PEOPLE AND THE PUBLIC GOOD

Preliminarily, I will constrict the definition of the
“public good” to communal or national public goods, or
goods aspired to—or believed/assumed to be aspired to from
the perspective of the state—by the communal or national
public. This type of goods may probably become global
public goods, but I wish to limit myself to communal or
national public goods, which are to be understood in the
politico-ethical sense. Hence, it becomes apparent that by
public good, in this section of the discussion, I do not
necessarily mean something to be understood from the
politico-economic sense.
A public good is that which benefits by its use the
communal or national public, that is to say, the greatest
number of the local or national population. This can be
perceived in two levels. The first level comes from the
people themselves: they perceive the public good to be
beneficial to most if not to all of them. This utilitarian
consideration is important in that, on the one hand, it serves
as the ethical standard by which the public— through a civil
society unify themselves in consideration of their
individual and social benefits. As individuals, they may of
course think in terms of their own selfish benefits from a
public good but there is also a recognition that unless they
work together for their common welfare, then the public
good aspired for may not materialize. And they as
individuals may suffer as beneficiaries from its
nonrealization. In this regard, the elements of unity (bonding
together individual interests) and subsidiarity (working
together for the common good) are significant aspects of a
national public good from the communal or national
people’s point of view. The second level comes from the
local or national government, which believes or assumes
with a utilitarian perspective that a particular project or
service is desired by the populace as necessary for their
common welfare. As such the local or national government
views it as a public good. Examples of these assumed necessary public services or public goods
are national
defense, education, public health, public ports/airports and
highways, social services, postal services, and the like.
COMMUNAL PEOPLE AND THE PUBLIC GOOD
I will presume that the communities, or the communal
people, will likewise perceive a national public good as a
communal public good. I think that in general this is the
case. There are, however, difficulties sometimes in that—on
occasions—a community or group of communities may
believe that their communal public good does not jibe—in
fact, may be in conflict with—the national public good.

A massive dam that will irrigate vast tracts of land and

provide thousands of megawatts of electricity that would be
connected to the national grid would undoubtedly be a
national public good and the national people would aspire to
have the government build it by expressly or tacitly
supporting the project. However, the communal people of
the place where the dam would be constructed may oppose it
as it would mean the loss of their ancestral lands, the
abandonment of their traditional means of livelihood, and
the confrontation with relocation problems in a new
environment as their communities would be submerged in
water. Sometimes the construction of the dam is abandoned
or not pursued despite its being a national public good
because the cost of the rebellion or resistance of the
communities would make it economically nonviable or
politically unexpedient.
I believe such a communal resistance is rare, and where
the communal public good and the national public good are
coincident, then the project would be pushed through. It
would seem in the example above that the national public
would have to wait for the tribal communities to be touched
by modernization to such an extent that they would be
amenable to sacrifice their tribal traditions and values for the
greatest good of the greatest number. Or, alternatively, the
local or national government will have to find—if at all
possible—other sources of energy and of irrigating lands. I
believe this is still an unresolved philosophical issue and
philosophers may offer a satisfactory solution as to which is
of national significance: to preserve a communal heritage as
part of the national heritage or to sacrifice it for the general
good in the pursuit of modernization and globalization.

GOVERNMENT AND THE PUBLIC GOOD

We must clearly distinguish between the national public
good as pursued by the national public on their
own initiative, with little or without the help of the local or
national government, and the national public good as
pursued by the local or national government with the support
of the national public. Both are desired generally by all in
the sense that its realization will redound to the general
public’s common good in terms of national pride, aesthetic
appreciation, national well-being, national moral uplift,
economic uplift, or all of the above. The first, however, is
pursued by civil societies with minimal support or without
the support of local and national governments while the
second is pursued by the local and/or national government
because its cost of implementation is so great civil societies
cannot afford to pursue it on their own.
The alleviation of poverty or eradication of slums in a
country is a public good in that it satisfies one or more of the
general considerations we set above: namely, that it at least
satisfies national well-being, national moral uplift, economic
uplift, and national pride. The fight against poverty is a pillar
in the political platform of many national governments and
funds are generally channeled through the governments’
social welfare ministries or departments. But usually the
funds are not enough. A civil society may come in and work
out its own slum eradication program through voluntary
contributions and massive mobilization of the society
at-large in terms of the voluntary participation of students,
workers, professionals, the wealthy, and the schools
(colleges and universities), among others.

THE PUBLIC GOOD FROM THE POLITICO

ECONOMIC SENSE

MICROECONOMY
Political economy, or economics in short, deals with
both the microeconomy of industrial and commercial firms
and with the macroeconomy of the nation. The
economic concept of the public good pertains to the benefit (profit) that may accrue an individual
or a firm in pursuing a
project that will offset possible losses or adverse effects and
that will likewise benefit the general public, including
possible external or free public riders. The basic assumption
is that the Homo economicus is a selfish individual who
would pursue an economic project either individually or in
group if he/she or they will benefit from it. A lamppost may
be costly but if the light it provides will make one’s store
very visible to the passersby and the customers, and in the
process raises one’s profits and offsets the cost of electricity,
then the lamppost will be built. But at the same time, the
noncustomers who would be passing by and the neighbors
(or, in general, the free public riders) will benefit from the
light, and in that sense the lamppost (or streetlight) is a
public good. Notice that the noncustomers or free riders
directly use—in a sense— the streetlight.
There are two criteria for considering something as a
public good, economically speaking: nonrivalry and
nonexcludability. A potable stream is a public good in that if
one drinks from it, the stream will not be diminished or
exhausted (nonrival) while at the same time no one is
excluded from drinking from it. One who fills his/her
container with water from the stream and brings that
container to his/her house will consider that container of
water as a private good. If he/she drinks from it, its content
will diminish and he/she can exclude others from drinking
from it.
There are a lot of arguments now which say that the
economic idea of the public good is ideal in that in practical
reality there are no such things in view of the development
of technology, the passage of laws or exclusionary
regulations that would tend to convert what appears to be a
public good to a private good, and other considerations
For example, the potable stream we talked about above
might in due time be apportioned to certain owners of titled
private lands and the whole stream may now be owned by
many landowners. As a result, not everyone is free to drink
from any portion of the stream without permission from the
owner of that portion. The free use of clean air can, in
practice, be limited by pollution (carbon dioxide, carbon
monoxide, etc.) or by the special use of oxygen (an element
of air) in, for example, hospitals. Hence, some economists
argue only for ideal or pure public goods to which external
reality approximates.

It is interesting to note that goods can be rivalrous and

excludable (private goods), rivalrous and nonexcludable
(common pool resources), nonrivalrous and excludable (club
goods), and nonrivalrous and nonexcludable (public goods).
Examples of the first are houses, cars, clothes, and the like.
Examples of the second are hunting games and fishing
grounds, among others. Deep-sea fishing is difficult to police
such that the world’s fish stocks while viewed as “finite and
diminishing,” appears as a nonexcludable resource. An
example of the third is cable television in that it is a public
good delivered as a private good. It is excludable because its
use is limited to a household but nonrivalrous because no
matter how many households will own a cable television, it
is not diminished. Finally, among the common examples of
public goods are defense and law enforcement, public
works, clean air, information goods, and suchlike (“Public
good,” Wikipedia 2006).
Between rivalry and nonexcludability, it is the latter that
is usually affected by technological progress and the status
of traditional public goods are modified to club goods,
private goods, or common resource goods. For example, in
cable television certain programs (boxing or movies) can be
seen on a pay-per-view basis. Thus, “encryption allows
broadcasters to sell individual access to their programming.”
The other side of technological progress is that it “can create new public goods.” Streetlights, for
instance—a relatively recent technological
good—is both nonrivalrous and nonexcludable

MACROECONOMY
We usually make a distinction between service and
profit orientations. Generally, industrial and business firms
are profit-oriented while governmental agencies are
service-oriented. Government-owned or -controlled
corporations are basically service-oriented although they are
encouraged to be self-liquidating and even accrue profits. In
many instances, especially in Third World countries, when a
government makes an accounting of all its corporations
(owned or controlled), the total is in the red, that is, there are
more losses than gains. And so the government puts in more
subsidies. In some instances, when the subsidies increase
rather than decrease, the losing corporation is privatized.
The government may substantially lose here, but it is only once, and it is generally perceived to
be in the interest of the
public (i.e., a public good in both politico-ethical and
economic senses). The yearly subsidies on that corporation
can be channeled to more productive projects while the same
service can be provided by the newly privatized corporation.
It might puzzle us why a newly privatized corporation
can generally make a losing government corporation
profitable. There are many reasons for this, and at least two
can be forwarded outright: one, the government corporation
has a bloated bureaucracy while the private one trims it
down to a manageable size to cut on overhead costs and,
two, government contracts for subprojects within the
corporation are laden with corruption and the costs are high
while the private one gets the lowest price for a subproject
to maximize its profits. In one discussion at the Catholic
University of America on corruption, for
example, a bank representative said that in Latin America
the corruption cap on a government project is at least twenty
percent which goes to certain government individuals.
Certainly, corruption—which is one of the public
bads—should be eradicated in government.
It is this service orientation that prods the government
to provide services through an unprofitable enterprise
because such an enterprise is considered by government as a
public good. It is generally demanded by the people,
especially in the provinces or suburbs. A postal service, for
example, is important in far-flung areas where private
mailing services cannot reach. Moreover, government postal
services are cheaper and affordable to everyone, especially
the poor, while private mail services are not, and are usually
patronized by the rich and the middle class.
It seems that, in general, what is considered as a public
good by the national public, and recognized as such by the
government (local and national), is the one in the
politico-ethical sense. It is basically service orientation.
Profits, although encouraged, is a secondary consideration.
There is no question that some government-owned or
-controlled corporations are profitable. For as long as the
corporation is substantially profitable, the government will
continue to hold on to it. It will be to the public good—in at
least the politico ethical sense—to add to the coffers of the
national government whatever benefits (profit remittance or
contributions or prestige) there can be. Where a government
corporation is a liability and, if there are private takers, then
the government usually privatizes it, for it considers it a public good to channel the subsidies on
that losing
corporation to more productive government projects.
In contrast, it appears that generally what is considered
a public good in the economic sense is mostly the concern of
the private sector of the economy. Some of the private public
goods are taken cared of by microeconomic firms, which can be of limited circulation
(within the village, city, or province) or can be of national
circulation. The private sector can actively contribute to the
realization of these public goods not only in their own
interests but also, externally, in the interests of the public
sector.
Where the private sector is not ready to shoulder the
cost of making a public good readily available, and where
the government considers it necessary for the general public,
then the government allocates funds for realizing that public
good either immediately or in the near future even if it
would be a losing proposition.

PRIVATE PUBLIC GOODS AND PUBLIC PUBLIC

GOODS
Earlier, we made a distinction between a private good
and a public good from the politico-economic sense. To
refresh our memory, a public good ideally is nonrival and
nonexcludable while a private good is rival and excludable.
We also made a distinction from the politico ethical sense
between a public good desired by the national public and a
public good recognized or assumed as such by the
government. Theoretically, at least, we raise these questions:
(1) Are public public goods nonrival and nonexcludable? (2)
Are private public goods in the interest of the national
public and recognized by the government as such?

PUBLIC PUBLIC GOODS

I can only adumbrate my arguments in this subtopic
which should require a very extensive treatment. Some
public public goods are considered by the government as
basic or essential and necessary: national security and
defense, education, postal service, health service, trade and
industry, and the like and certain ministries or departments
are created to address and manage these public goods. The general public recognizes these as
public
goods as well in that they as riders benefit from them. Of
course, they are not entirely independent free riders, for they
somehow help pay for these governmental public goods
through paying their taxes directly or indirectly. So are also
the members of the private economic sector: they recognize
these as public goods, and in many cases they supplement
these public public goods with their private public goods as
in establishing private schools, private hospitals, private
security services, and so on.
From the above consideration, it would seem that
Theoretically public public goods are nonrival and
Nonexcludable in that the participation of one does not in
Principle diminish—for example, education as a public
Good—or exclude others from participating in it. At the
Same time, these public goods are in the interest not only of
The individual public but the nation as a whole as well.
There are public public goods, which the private sector
Does not generally want to participate because it is too costly
And it would rather be a free rider itself as in the
Construction of national highways and bridges (although
Recently in the Philippines private toll highways or skyways
Are beginning to exist).
We have already mentioned the nonrealization of a
Public public good, which both the national public and the
Government recognize as such because of the resistance of
The communities (communal publics) adversely affected by
It (such as the construction of a dam).

PRIVATE PUBLIC GOODS

Private public goods are goods which the private sector
Sets up either by itself or in participation with the
Government (local or national) since the private sector sees
Their realization as profitable, and the general public benefits
From them as well either as customers or asfree riders.
In practice, what seems to be theoretically a public
Good (in the sense of nonrival and nonexcludable) becomes
In many cases—as we have already said above—ephemeral.
It is even argued that a public good is practically nonexistent
One way or the other. A private good can be enjoyed by
Others whereas a public good can be restricted. Moreover, any participation of one private
company in a line of
Business necessarily diminishes the chances of profitability
Of others in that same line. When viewed as overcrowded,
The local or national government issues a regulation limiting
The number of companies that can engage in such a business,
Which is a form of exclusion.
Here is a quote from Hans-Hermann Hoppe (1989,
28-29):
While at least at first glance it seems that some
Of the state-provided goods and services might
Indeed qualify as public goods, it certainly is not
Obvious how many of the goods and services that
Are actually produced by states could come under
The heading of public goods. Railroads, postal
Services, telephone, streets, and the like seem to be
Goods whose usage can be restricted to the persons
Who actually finance them, and hence appear to be
Private goods….Just as a lot of state-provided
Goods appear to be private goods, so many
Privately produced goods seem to fit in the
Category of a public good. Clearly my neighbors
Will profit from my well-kept rose garden—they
Could enjoy the sight of it without even helping me
Garden. The same is true of all kinds of
Improvements that I could make on my property as
Well. Even those people who do not throw money
In his hat can profit from a street musician’s
Performance. Those fellow passengers on the bus
Who did not help me buy it profit from my deodorant. And everyone who ever meets me would
profit from my efforts,
Undertaken without their financial support, to turn
Myself into a lovable person.
Without going deeper into an analysis of this quotation,
Which shows how the economic criteria of nonrivalry and
Nonexcludability can put us into an intellectual quagmire,
Perhaps—for the purposes of this paper—we keep the
Essential distinction between service orientation and profit
Orientation as the distinctive marks between the goods or
Services provided by the state (government) and by the
Private sector.

MIXED PUBLIC GOODS

Mixed public goods are undertaken by some private
Organizations or civil societies for the common good of the
Communal or national public. These are basically
Service-oriented. The public goods pursued are mixed in the
Sense that the undertakers are private groups and yet they
Seek not profits (unlike private firms) but service (like the
Government). Once these private groups make profit the
Primary consideration, then they become private
Corporations or cooperatives.
The national situation regarding this matter is actually
Complicated. We recently read reports of companies closed
Because of pollution (of the atmosphere or river or sea), of
Governments prescribing regulations of newly-built factories
To have a pollution control system, of laws restricting the use
Of certain machineries or gadgets that largely contribute to
Pollution, and so on. We also hear of cases where laws or
Ordinances are passed to curb criminality or to check on
Corruption practices of both the private and public sectors.

PUBLIC BADS
Public bads are negative goods which the general public
Scorns, and in many cases, are avoided or not tolerated by
Both the private and public sectors. Some of these are
Corruption, pollution, crimes, and the like. In the early stages
Of economic development, these public bads existed and
Were generally tolerated or taken for granted by the national
Public, the private sector, and the local/national government.
However, when the national public begins to feel that its
Personal security or health is threatened, then it starts to
Clamor for laws and regulations curbing or eradicating these
Public bads.
CONCLUSION
As regards the notion of the public good, I agree with
The view that this notion is largely ideal or pure. It is a
Prescriptive standard by which we try to approximate in
Practice since we notice that in practice there is no public
Good that is purely nonrival and nonexcludable. It would
Seem reasonable to reclarify and redefine the concept of the
Public good, not in its ideal (economic) sense but in its
Practical (ethical) sense. However, I want to qualify
Immediately that the ethical sense I am referring to here is
Limited to activities of a rational private sector and a rational public sector (government or its
agencies). On the one hand,
The rationality of the private sector is determined by its profit
Orientation. It would be irrational for such a sector to pursue
A losing project or build an enterprise in a business area that
Is overcrowded. On the other hand, the rationality of the
Public sector is determined by its service orientation. It
Seems that where the private and public sectors are
Irrational, no public good, but perhaps a public bad, is
Essentially served.
Now, let me go to the concluding observations.

First, the public good is “public” in the sense that the

Beneficiary is the general public, that is, the local or the
National public either directly or indirectly (as a free rider).
Second, it is pursued by the private (economic) sector
For the sake of profit and in view of its profit orientation. It
Assumes the individual person as a Homo economicus, that
Is, a selfish individual who desires to satisfy his or her
Personal needs or wants. And a private company or
Corporation is a Homo economicus writ large.
Third, the public good is pursued by the local or
National government for the sake of the general public and in
View of its social-service orientation. It assumes the
Individual person as a Homo politicus (in the Aristotelian
Sense), that is, a socio-political individual who desires to
Satisfy not only his or her personal needs or wants but also
Those of others since he or she recognizes the need for the
Others in order to survive. And the government (or state) is a
Homo politicus writ large.
Fourth, the private sector pursues a public good through
Its own initiative when it believes the public good is
Affordable and profitable even if there will be external riders
To it. Otherwise, it will allow the government to pursue a
Public good and it will simply make itself a rider to it. In
Other cases, the private sector participates with the
Government in the pursuit of a public good for as long as its
Profit orientation is satisfied.
Fifth, the government pursues a public good through its
Own initiative when it believes that that public good can be
Had with financial reasonability for the welfare of the
General public. By “financial reasonability,” I mean to say
That the government can afford it outright or can obtain a
Loan which it can pay over a period of time without unduly
Jeopardizing the other basic services of the people, or it can
Let the people pay the tolls (as in highways) or pay a tax whenever a person makes use of the
services (as in an airport tax). There is no
Doubt that some of these pursuits may be convertible
Politically into election votes, but this is a consequence
Rather than the goal of government. Where the government
Is irrational, the public good it pursues (for election
Purposes, e.g., rather than for the welfare of the public) is
Only apparent since its real cost to the general public in the
Long run will be such as to cause the general public to
Eventually suffer (usually in terms of curtailment of its other
Basic services since funds allotted or intended for these
Services are used for other purposes).
Sixth, private organizations or civil societies pursue a
Public good through their own initiative when they
Recognize that the government cannot do it for them, but
They believe—by collective effort with little or even without
The help of government—they can do the project for the sake
Of communal, organizational, or national welfare. It is also
Conceivable that a private business firm may pursue a public
Good in a purely nonprofit altruistic gesture,that is, a public
Service, as in constructing a bridge for an isolated communal
Village, without any direct or indirect financial returns. It is
In this sense that the pursued public good is practically
Viewed as mixed.
Seventh, any benefit that a private or public person may
Enjoy or experience—as a free rider—from a private, public,
Or mixed good is an externality.
The riding public that
Enjoys the pleasant smell of one’s private use of a deodorant,
For example, is an externality since it does not emanate from
A direct use by the public of the deodorant. A passersby who
Walks on a lighted street directly use—in one sense—the
Streetlight which, in that respect, is a public good.
Finally, the politico-ethical dimension of the notion of
The public good is preferable since it subsumes the
Politico-economic dimension in both the ideal and practical
Senses of the term. That is to say, the practical sense—in its
Contingent reality—subsumes the ideal sense as a
Prescriptive standard. The whole direction ofthis paper is epistemic in nature as it tries to know
the sense
By which the notion of the public good can be consistently
Viewed and understood. The practical application of this
Sense (assumed to have already been made clear), or the phronetic aspect, will come later.

Accomplish the Metacognitive Reading Report based on what you understand in the given
article.

1. Difficult Concepts you anticipated

A.
B.

2. Learning Insights

a. Before reading the article, I thought that

b. However, after reading the article, I now think/ learned that
c. Before reading the article, I thought that
d. However, after reading the article, I now think/ learned that

3. Unanswered questions in your mind about the article

a.
b.