Albert Hirshman describes an economic motion in his book Exit, Voice and Loyalty (1970). Parties can withdraw if they do not care for a product or arrangement. They may attempt to impact the process by exercising their voice. Over time, loyalties develop, which influence the superstructure of relationships.
It seems Hirshman would agree with his contemporary, Milton Friedman, about the benefits of school vouchers. Should a family be displeased with a pedantic school district, they could collect a coupon for their tax dollar input and cash it in at another more vibrant district. Since schools are tied to geographies, consumers always have the choice to relocate their homes to attend elsewhere. Vouchers make the process more fungible.
Hirschman outlined the logic of the exit option and how noted how increased competition could improve government performance. But competition didn’t solve all problems, and the exit option had several important drawbacks. The freedom to exit was often used by the most ambitious, educated, or well-to-do users of a particular service, and once they exited, those remaining were even poorer, less educated, and less demanding. Moreover, Hirschman pointed out, the possibility of exit weakened the effectiveness of voice, that is, the ability to directly change the management’s behavior through feedback, discussion, and criticism.
As Frank Fukuyama explains in his American Interest piece, Hirshman didn’t believe vouchers were the answer to improving a school system. Unlike other commodities, the departure of the stronger students from the classroom has a negative impact on the remaining students. This observation gives a new form to education. Casting the product in this light projects a little amber glow onto all members of the school community. The mission is to educate everyone. If not an educator or a student, the role may be to voice praise or criticism.
A school does not produce widgets on an assembly line, but a group process produces educated students. Changing the composition of the pool of players can have both positive and negative effects on the outcomes. And there are roles for an audience as well.
Home Economics 