Part I – (this draws on opportunity cost (Ch 1) and markets (Ch 3)) Describe the market for kidney organs, as it would be in a free market without government intervention, using what you have learned about scarcity, marginal analysis in decision-making, and markets. You must include a discussion of resources, supply and demand, as well as marginal benefits and marginal costs. Think of this as an explanation of the pros and cons of the market using economic terminology. Describe the benefits and costs but leave the discussion of organ rationing and other solutions to the problems in this market for the next part. Describe this market using supply and demand; reference your graph in your description. Include “graph 1” of this market at the end of the paper (not included in page count). This should be a discussion without mentioning Price Controls, only discuss how the kidney organ market would be without government intervention. Feel free to use any stats or data that you find through your own research – make sure you use econ terminology. Part II – (this draws on government (Ch 4) to improve the discussion made in Part I) Consider the reasons why the market for kidney organs is not a free market in the US, specifically discuss equity concerns. Expand on your discussion of the market from Part I, using what you have learned about government interventions/price controls. Discuss the current government intervention in the Kidney Market in the U.S. Describe this market – comparing the free market and to the government intervention in one graph – using supply and demand; reference and discuss your graph in your paper. Explain the current government intervention and exactly how it corrects the problems of the free market. Include any other beneficial aspects of the intervention that you find through your own research – make sure you use econ terminology throughout. Also discuss other Donation Systems Around the World, no need to add a graph here. Explore the policies that are currently implemented across the globe (i.e. some discussed in the articles include – routine removal, presumed consent, organ donor points, “no give, no take”, etc.). Evaluate the limitations of these policies. Also consider how these policies fare in terms of the efficiency vs. equity debate. (You do not need to critique them all, just select from 2 or 3 different countries that you find interesting/appealing.)
Part 3 – (this draws on welfare analysis regulation (Ch 4) to improve the argument made in the Rough Draft as well as describe an unintended consequence) Consider regulations in the US kidney market and the negative aspects of the government intervention. In addition to improving your paper based on the feedback you received, add to your previous discussion of the US kidney market using what you have learned about DWL and welfare analysis; specifically discuss efficiency concerns as a result of the intervention. You may have discussed DWL in the rough draft but you should elaborate on that discussion and really focus on what causes the DWL and in what ways is loss generate, exactly who is impacted and how; give specific examples. Part 4 – (this requires you to offer a creative alternate solution to the consequence you described above) Now put yourself in the role of a social advocate. Noting the problems you presented above, what solutions do you have to help protect society? Offer an alternative solution that addresses the issues you noted in the rough draft and avoids the problems you noted above. Be creative, you are not limited to possible government interventions but should also consider potential interventions from other groups in society.
