 |
| university of Nairobi students |
Opportunity
costs of rioting
After witnessing multiple riots in
campuses, some of the incidences (whose genesis or relevance is hard to
recall). Albeit it seems everyone has an explanation for why they happened.
Often, these reasons gainsay each other. But one reason really vexed my
interest a colleague contended that this all boiled down to opportunity costs.
It turns out he’s not alone; there’s a whole body of literature that has looked
at the opportunity costs of rioting and its conclusions are mesmerizing,
strangely instinctual and entirely germane today.
Let’s
get down to the rudimentary and brass tacks, a bantam Economics 101. What is an
opportunity cost? “The cost of an alternative that must be forgone in order to
pursue a certain action. Put another way, the benefits you could have received
by taking an alternative action.” Applied to rioting, this sounds something
like this: the expected returns of rioting versus staying at home. I should
specify that the “returns on rioting” include not just the value of electronics
or cakes looted from your local store or confection but also, however gross
this sounds, the satisfaction derived from rioting.
Walking the five or so kilometers’ to your destination while causing bedlam
provides an epic experience. calls of arms and ‘comrades power’ ensures none of
the student wants to be left behind lest
you be labeled a ‘quisling’ or worse a ‘stool pigeon’, though there are those
who pledge to the "Cowards Never Die" school of thought, and prefer
to stay at home.
In
the short-term, there are two variables that are key to understanding why
students choose “rioting” over staying at home. First, there’s the issue of
expected punishment and victimization from the university administration .research
suggests that if you expect rapid and severe punishment, you are less likely to
riot.
Second,
and linked to this, there’s the issue of chaos: when students see the lawlessness
that reigns in during the riots, many think “why not?” university
administration calls these people “carpetbaggers” simply meaning opportunists,
economists call them “free riders”.
Applied
to the riots in universities, what this basically tells us is that whereas in
normal circumstances, the equilibrium in society is “not rioting”, in past
incidences, the equilibrium in some institutions shifted to “rioting”. As a
result, the costs of rioting virtually disappeared: people saw chaos, didn’t think
disorder on this scale would be punished and so jumped in. In terms of policy,
this suggests that the senate and disciplinary proceedings around the
universities really are important: it will have an impact on student’s
perception of the expected costs of rioting.
As
for the long-term reasons for rioting, existing research is more ambiguous.
Several pundits have suggested that it is the economy’s slump, high cost of
living and poverty that create the conditions for this unrest. They’re only partially
right. Studies suggest that economic growth decreases the likelihood of rioting
but poverty, and even income inequality, has no clear impact. Instead, and this
may well be where Keynesian’s rules and policies fit in, the likelihood of
crime and riots increases if people have low expectations about their future
income. Under successive Educational policies, social mobility has collapsed.
And under this government, there is certainly the perception that university
education will become prohibitively expensive for many. So while we are moving
to a more stratified economic model under this plutocratic regime, where low
income people no longer expect to rise to the next income bracket, we are also
sowing the seeds of cacophony for further crime and future social unrest in our
institutions of higher learning.
It
all boils down to the “why not riot?” question. In the short-term, potential
rioters need to have the impression that the police can control the streets and
that rioting will be punished. This should take care of the “carpetbaggers”.
But it will not solve the problem altogether. In the long-term, economic growth
and social mobility (or at least the perception of it) really matters. If this
isn’t taken care of, there will always be a core of people for whom the
expected returns of rioting are greater than the returns of staying at home.
