Talk:Market failure

Compliments

Truly excellent work on this article! Good work everyone! --ShaunMacPherson 05:52, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Lede changed market failure summary

Lede change recently been changed, summarising market failure net social welfare loss. Before it was summarised as non-Pareto-efficient state. The two are related, which best summaries, or something else?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Market_failure&type=revision&diff=822099108&oldid=821390096

Jonpatterns (talk) 05:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, this lede change seems inappropriate. Social welfare is too contestable of a term to use in the Wikipedia voice. Non-Patero-efficient is more accurate, but difficult to understand. I think maximizing economic value is the most accurate language to use.Masebrock (talk) 17:32, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Kaldor–Hicks efficiency is a more general formulation than Pareto efficiency. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 19:00, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Sherry F. Yeung (S4381861): article assessment

This is a High-importance and C-class economics quality article. It a well-written article with a detailed explanation of market failure, which can brings the idea to viewers. The article has utilised economic evidence and theory and using formal writing, easy for people to read, though it is recommended to provide more real-life examples for further elaborations. The article includes areas and perspective within the economic area quite comprehensively but need more in-depth so as to provide people with a clearer view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherryfyeung (talk • contribs) 02:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Review

Good article, few minor changes including citations and grammar. Also created new link. DomBarclay (talk) 08:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

In none of these cases does the criterion of Pareto efficiency obtain

Obtain what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.145.244.194 (talk) 09:33, 15 April 2022 (UTC)