The anatomy of externalities

Abstract Debates over externalities often focus on failures: theories favouring state action rest on the notion of market failures, whereas those opposing state involvement emphasize governmental failures. The two polar approaches ignore a wide array of alternatives to manage externalities that are neither exclusively market-based nor state-oriented. Yet the literature has failed to unify these different approaches and alternatives into a single cohesive framework—this is the primary goal of this essay. This article proposes a new taxonomic framework for externalities based on the interplay between the physical attribute of an externality (scale) and its property-rights dimension, acknowledging the scope of both market-based and state-based approaches to internalizing externalities but moving beyond the narrow dichotomy to incorporate a wide range of alternative and hybrid solutions. This framework adds the much-needed nuance to academic and policy discussions about the scope and limitations of markets and states in addressing complex and nested externalities. It offers a pragmatic and less abstract way to map externalities to potential policy solutions or to the organizations best suited to address them.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cambridge Journal of Economics
Published
2026-01-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beag003
Primary Topic
Public-Private Partnership Projects
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The anatomy of externalities

Pablo Paniagua, Veeshan Rayamajhee
Cambridge Journal of Economics
Public-Private Partnership Projects
article

The anatomy of externalities

Pablo Paniagua, Veeshan Rayamajhee
article en

Abstract

Abstract Debates over externalities often focus on failures: theories favouring state action rest on the notion of market failures, whereas those opposing state involvement emphasize governmental failures. The two polar approaches ignore a wide array of alternatives to manage externalities that are neither exclusively market-based nor state-oriented. Yet the literature has failed to unify these different approaches and alternatives into a single cohesive framework—this is the primary goal of this essay. This article proposes a new taxonomic framework for externalities based on the interplay between the physical attribute of an externality (scale) and its property-rights dimension, acknowledging the scope of both market-based and state-based approaches to internalizing externalities but moving beyond the narrow dichotomy to incorporate a wide range of alternative and hybrid solutions. This framework adds the much-needed nuance to academic and policy discussions about the scope and limitations of markets and states in addressing complex and nested externalities. It offers a pragmatic and less abstract way to map externalities to potential policy solutions or to the organizations best suited to address them.

Cambridge Journal of EconomicsVol. 50(2)
New Mexico State University (US), Universidad del Desarrollo (CL)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Public-Private Partnership Projects
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.