Dogonomics

Mind your steps as in the Year of Dog as always. Fengshui master tells you that stepping onto dog dirt brings bad luck. There shouldn't be any exception during the coming year.

In their column in The New York Times Magazine, Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, discussed how to deal with the problem of dog doop. After horses' manure in the 19th century, dogs' wastes have brought another threats to the hygienic environment in the urban streets. The authors guess the dog population in New York is one million, making the dog-to-human ratio to be 1-to-20. If 99% of all the dog owners pick up after their dogs. That still leaves poop produced by 10,000 dogs uncleared in the street everyday. The fine for inconsiderate dogkeepers is US$50 for the first offense, which is clearly not threatening enough. The law enforcement appeared to be very relaxed. Only 471 dog-waste violations were ticketed.

The majority of dogkeepers pick up after their dogs. How can we stop the inconsiderate dogkeepers? One of the new ideas is to license the dogs and keeping their DNA records. Once the dirts are found in the street, the government officers will trace the DNA records and mail the offending owner a ticket. It would cost US$30 million to establish a DNA databank for all dogs in New York, let alone the administrative expenses to be incurred case-by-case, which makes such a practice nonsense.

i wonder if we can invent a kind of diaper customized for dogs. The government could make a rule requiring all dogkeepers to have their dogs wearing diapers in the street. Any violation will be fined. i am not sure such a rule will breach animal's rights, or petkeeper's rights. If this law is established, a whole new income stream will be generated for the industry of pet supplies and diaper manufacturers, such as Pampers.

When people enjoy convenience that brings soical costs, i think, "privatizing" the social costs, by mandating the use of diapers or fining, could be a remedy, but never a complete solution. After all, everyone being considerate is a key to eliminating negative externalities. Keeping the street clean very much relies on doglovers' disciplines. Standing in the dog's shoes, you don't want to walk in dirty streets especially in your bare feet.



******


Dogs, well-known to be loyal and honest, know who owns what more clearly than many people, according to Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the disolvation of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Communist world joined China, which started the reform in 1979, to follow the market economy. Today, proverty is prevailing in large part of these countries. Capitalism has failed to bring prosperity, some people criticize. Hernando points out that macroeconomic reforms cannot be built on sand. The rule of law, beginning with the property law, forms the bedrock of capitalism.

Without a private property system, infrastructure and building development, and businesses cannot draw financing. The problem is a majority of the population of developing and former communist countries do not have legal property rights over their assets. These assets include land, businesses and intellectual know how. The property rights should also be well documented in a formal legal system, which is a further obstacle in the developing countries.

During a trip to Bali, Indonesia, Hernando wandered in the fields of rice, with no idea where the property boundaries were. But the dogs knew, as he recalled. "Every time I crossed from one farm to another, a different dog barked. Those Indonesian dogs may have been ignorant of formal law, but they were positive about which assets their masters controlled." When Indonesian ministers consulted Hernando about the establishment of a property system in rural Indonesia, this economist told them thatIndonesian dogs had the basic information they needed to set up a formal property system. He asked them to start from the sketches by listening to the barking dogs. "Ah, reponded one of the ministers, "jukum adat" (the people's law)!"


******


Dogs have an economic mind.

In "Cafe Hayek", a blog named after economist Friedrich Hayek, Don Boudreaux explains his dog's behavior by economics. He just bought a 10-week-old soft-coated wheaten terrier, Molly, while he has a 14-year-old beagle, Priscilla. The two dogs get along well, except when Molly approaches Priscilla's food bowl. Priscilla becomes fierce and growls whenever Molly comes close to her food bowl. Molly is scared away.

However, both dogs peacefully share the same water bowl. Priscilla has no complaint about it. They often drink from the same bowl together.

How comes the difference? Water is an essence of life as food. A dog can live longer without food than it can live without water. In that sense, water is more important than food. Why does Priscilla care more about her food than her water?

To answer this question, Boudreaux borrows the concept of marginal analysis. By the survival of fittest hypothesis, dog's ancestors in the wild learnt that water is more easily accessible than food. Put differently, an additional unit of food is more costly to gain than an additional unit of water, which makes the protection of food more worth fighting for.

What a nice homey place to learn economics if only you keep at least two dogs!

Jan 25, 2006
Copyright Quamnet