Conclusion
Although Kahn's theorizing may be criticized in various ways, there is no doubt that he succeeds in arriving at the correct conclusion. Significant social benefits were to be attained through increasing competition, i.e., through deregulation, in all of the industries that are considered in his analysis. As chairman of the Civil Aeronautics Board, Kahn courageously and effectively acted to bring about the benefits from deregulation that he predicted would be forthcoming, for which this nation, if not the world, should be grateful.
In this book, Kahn argues persuasively for increasing thecompetitive component in regulated industries in order to achieve greater economic efficiency. The message of the book endures, as is befitting the book's stature as a classic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Clarence E. Ayres, “The Place of the Market Economy in Institutional Thought,”Social Science Quarterly, March 1971, pp. 995–6.
J. H. Clapham, “Of Empty Economic Boxes,”Economic Journal, 1922, pp. 305–14, reprinted in American Economic Association,Readings in Price Theory, K. E. Boulding and G. J. Stigler, eds., Chicago: Richard D. Irwin, 1952, pp. 119–30.
W. J. Baumol, “On the Proper Cost Test for Natural Monopoly in a Multi-Product Industry,”American Economic Review, December 1977, pp. 809–22.
Coldwell Daniel, III, “The Folklore of Public Utilities,”Southern Quarterly, July 1964, pp. 293–306.
_____, “The Regulation of Private Enterprises as Public Utilities,”Social Research, Summer 1967, pp. 347–54.
_____, “The Market for a Consumers' Good under Universally Competitive Conditions: A Complete Summary,”Social and Economic Studies, December 1967, pp. 365–89.
_____, “Toward a Reconciliation of Institutional Economics and Its Critics,”Social Science Quarterly, March 1970, pp. 1035–6.
_____,Mathematical Models in Microeconomics, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1970.
_____, “Institutionalism and Conventional Economics: Complements or Substitutes?,”Social Science Quarterly, March 1971, pp. 992–4.
_____, “On the Shapes of the Isoquants of Finite-Processes Production Functions,”Journal of Economics and Business, 1975–76, pp. 75–8.
_____, “The Present State of the Theory of Public Utilities,”Atlantic Economic Journal, July 1979, pp. 39–45.
_____, “The Process of Adjustment from One Long-Run Equilibrium to Another: The Competitive Case,”Scottish Journal of Political Economy, August 1986, pp. 284–91.
Lewis E. Hill, “Another Attempt to Reconcile Institutional Economics and Its Critics,”Social Science Quarterly, March 1971, pp. 990–1.
Sam Peltzman, “Toward a More General Theory of Regulation,”Journal of Law and Economics, August 1976, pp. 211–40.
Richard A. Posner, “Taxation by Regulation,”Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Spring 1971, pp. 22–50.
_____, “Theories of Economic Regulation,”Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Summer 1974, pp. 335–58.
George J. Stigler, “The Theory of Economic Regulation,”Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Spring 1971, pp. 3–21.
Rutledge Vining,Economics in the United States of America, Paris: UNESCO, 1956.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The author expresses his appreciation to the Book Review Editor of this journal, the two anonymous referees, Janice A. Sears, Khy and Anne Alexis Daniel, and Tonya Katsoulis for their tolerance, encouragement, and suggestions. The author alone is responsible for any errors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Daniel, C. The economics of regulation: Principles and institutions Alfred E. Kahn Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1988, Vol. I, 199 pp., Vol. II, 360 pp.. Atlantic Economic Journal 18, 96–103 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298975
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298975