What are public goods?
The concept of public goods was classically defined by economist Paul A. Samuelson in the mid-twentieth century. According to the definitionin his essayThe Pure Theory of Public Expenditure, a public good is one whose consumption by one individual does not diminish its availability to others, meaning that it can be jointly enjoyed by all.[1]
Building on this formulation, public goods are commonly understood to possess two defining characteristics: non-excludability, whereby individuals cannot be prevented from using the good once it is provided, and non-rivalry, whereby an additional user does not impose significant additional costs.
Non-excludability refers to the fact that once a public good is provided, it is difficult or impossible to prevent others from using it, regardless of who financed or supplied it.[2]
Non-rivalry, by contrast, means that one individual’s use of the good does not significantly reduce its availability to others. In practice, this implies that serving an additional user generates little to no additional cost, even as the number of users increases.[2]
Based on these two characteristics, goods are commonly classified into three categories: pure public goods, quasi-public goods (club goods and congestible public goods), and private goods.
Note: Rivalry increases with the number of users in congestible public goods.
Figure | Classification of goods by excludability and rivalry
Adapted from the paper written by Cheng&Guan (2002)
What are the common public goods?
It is important to note that truly pure public goods are relatively rare and are often not tangible items. In many cases, they take the form of maintained conditions or institutional environments, such as public security, legal order, shared rules, or systems of knowledge.
National defense, basic scientific research, and legal systems are commonly regarded astypical public goods. In addition, many outputs produced by international organizations also exhibit the characteristics of public goods. A well-known example is the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted by the United Nations in 2015, which provides a shared framework for global development efforts.
The Five Principles of Peaceful Co-Existence, proposed in 1953, are often regarded as the first public good contribution to the international community by the People’s Republic of China. As an international legal principle emphasizing sovereignty, equality, and peaceful coexistence, the Five Principles are widely considered to have influenced the development of cooperation and norms of peaceful interaction among developing countries.
Education, a public good?
Within the framework defined by non-excludability and non-rivalry, education is often understood as a quasi-public good, positioned between pure public goods and private goods. Its degree of publicness largely depends onhow education is financed and provided.
Some scholars assess the public nature of education by examiningits modes of provision. When education is offered by the state as part of a compulsory and publicly funded system, it is generally regarded as a public good. By contrast, when education is delivered through market and access is conditioned on the payment of fees, it is more commonly treated as a private good.[3]
In 2015, UNESCO introduced the concept of the “global common good” in its report Rethinking Education: Toward a global common good?, calling for a renewed understanding of education’s public character in an increasingly interconnected world.
Rethinking Education: Toward a global common good?report
(Source: https://unesdoc.unesco.org)
If national defense and legal order are understood as constituting a form of public environment, the value of education lies not only in the transmission of knowledge, but also in the ongoing development of individual social capacities.
However, the public nature of education does not emerge automatically with the establishment of schools or curricula. Rather, it is enabled by qualified teachers who possess professional expertise and sound educational judgment.
From this perspective, realizing the public character of education is not solely a matter of expanding access to schooling, but also of ensuring adequate conditions for teachers’ professional development. Only when teachers worldwide are able to benefit from sustained and high-quality professional development opportunities can education generate stable and wide-ranging social externalities.[4]
The shortage of qualified teachers is widely recognized as one of the pressing challenges facing education systems today. In this context, teacher education and professional development can be understood as a form of public resource that increasingly requires cross-border cooperation.Through its open and accessible teacher training and professional development initiatives, UNESCO-TEC contributes to the development of teacher education as a public good, while fostering international collaboration and knowledge sharing among teachers worldwide.
Photo｜“Share Maths”: aTech-Book resource for mathematics teachers
developed by the TEC team and shared with teachers in African countries
Reference：
[1] Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 36(4), 387–389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1925895
[2] Cheng, H., & Guan, L. (2002). 对公共产品理论的认识 [An understanding of public goods theory]. Journal of Hebei University of Economics and Trade, (06), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.14178/j.cnki.issn1007-2101.2002.06.003
[3] Wang, Y., & An, M. (2004). Is Education Public Goods？A Definition of the Economic Nature of Education. Fudan Education Forum, (05), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.13397/j.cnki.fef.2004.05.007
[4] Cao, X. (2013). The Teacher Education’s Product Attributes and Government Responsibility——Analysis from the Perspective of Public Goods Theory. Teacher Education Research, 25(06), 6–12. https://doi.org/10.13445/j. cnki.t.e.r.2013.06.002
[5] Qin, Y. (2006). 论公共产品的本质——兼论公共产品理论的局限性 [On the nature of public goods: Also on the limitations of public goods theory]. Economist, (03), 77–82. https://doi.org/10.16158/j.cnki.51-1312/f.2006.03.011
Quick Catch-up:
1. Rethinking Education: Toward a global common good?
The 2025 International Forum on Education Development further emphasized that education for international understanding should focus on three core principles: respect, openness, and inclusiveness. By strengthening intercultural dialogue, such education seeks to cultivate a humanistic spirit among future generations.
Rethinking Education: Toward a Global Common Good? is intended as an invitation to dialogue. Published by UNESCO in 2015, the Rethinking Education report reaffirms a humanistic vision of education, highlighting inclusion, equality of rights, and cultural diversity. Grounded in a humanistic approach to education and development, the report emphasizes respect for life and human dignity, equality of rights, social justice, cultural diversity, international solidarity, and shared responsibility for a sustainable future.
Link:https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232555
EditorXU Jianan,UNESCO-TEC
