Public interest
Encyclopedia
The public interest refers to the "common well-being" or "general welfare." The public interest is central to policy debate
s, politics, democracy and the nature of government itself. While nearly everyone claims that aiding the common well-being or general welfare is positive, there is little, if any, consensus on what exactly constitutes the public interest, or whether the concept itself is a coherent one.
According to the Random House Dictionary, Public interest is "1. the welfare or well-being of the general public; commonwealth. 2. appeal or relevance to the general populace: a news story of public interest."
Economist Lok Sang Ho in his Public Policy and the Public Interest(Routledge, 2012, published 2011) argues that the public interest must be assessed impartially and therefore defines the public interest as the "ex ante welfare of the representative individual." Under a thought experiment, assuming that there is an equal chance for one to be anyone in society, and thus could benefit or suffer from a change, the public interest is by definition enhanced whenever that change is preferred to the status quo ex ante. This approach is "ex ante" in the sense that the change is not evaluated after the fact, but assessed before the fact without knowing whether one would actually benefit or suffer from it. This approach follows the "veil of ignorance" approach, which was first proposed by John Harsanyi but popularized by John Rawls in his 1971 Theory of Justice. Historically, however, the approach can be traced to John Stuart Mill, who in his letter to George Grote, explained: “human happiness, even one’s own, is in general more successfully pursued by acting on general rules, than by measuring the consequences of each act; and this is still more the case with the general happiness, since any other plan would not only leave everybody uncertain what to expect, but would involve perpetual quarrelling….”(in Francis E.Mineka and Dwight N.Lindley (eds)The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume XIV - The Later Letters of John Stuart Mill 1849-1873 Part I, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul,Published 1972, Vol. XV, p.762, 1862.)
Based on the ex post approach, for instance, there are different views on how many members of the public must benefit from an action before it can be declared to be in the public interest: at one extreme, an action has to benefit every single member of society in order to be truly in the public interest; at the other extreme, any action can be in the public interest as long as it benefits some of the population and harms none. But these extreme views are clearly not very useful in practice, since most cases of public policy involve some people gaining and some people losing.
Nicholas Kaldor and John Hicks offer two alternative but related ways to resolve the problem. The basic concept is that the gainers must gain more than the losers lose. Kaldor stated that the gainers must be able to compensate all the losers and still go along with the change, if the change is in the public interest. Hicks stated that the losers must NOT be able to bribe the gainers from forgoing the change, if the change is good for the public interest. It is observed that the Kaldorian position, if the compensations actually take place, is no different from the Pareto improvement criterion for enhancing social welfare. But if compensations do not actually take place, with gainers merely "potentially compensating the losers," people will not come to a consensus and agree that the change enhances the public interest.
But it should be clear that some acts in the public interest can be bad for some individuals. There may be an agreement that some interests are unique to the public. Stephen Krasner, a political scientist used a similar methodology in his book Defending the National Interest. Krasner identifies cases in which no corporate interest is found in US foreign policy in order to identify and analyze a national interest. The ex ante approach to the definition of the public interest would encompass this.
Public interest law is widely understood as including at least civil representation through legal aid
organizations and indigent criminal defense provided either by legal aid or the public defender
(depending on the country). Other non-profit organizations that provide legal advice and representation to poor people also fall under the umbrella of public interest law.
laws in the UK).
Also, judges in common law
systems can make judgements on the grounds of public policy
, a related term.
According to the Communications Act of 1934
, SEC. 303. "Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Commission from time to time, as public convenience, interest, or necessity requires, shall-...(g) Study new uses for radio, provide for experimental uses of frequencies, and generally encourage the larger and more effective use of radio in the public interest."
The Telecommunications Act of 1996
requires the regulators must make sure all regulation is consistent with the requirement of "public interest, convenience, and necessity." (e.g. SEC. 251. INTERCONNECTION (2)(B))
Policy debate
Policy debate is a form of speech competition in which teams of two advocate for and against a resolution that typically calls for policy change by the United States federal government or security discourse...
s, politics, democracy and the nature of government itself. While nearly everyone claims that aiding the common well-being or general welfare is positive, there is little, if any, consensus on what exactly constitutes the public interest, or whether the concept itself is a coherent one.
Definitions
According to the Webster's New World Dictionary, Public interest means "the people’s general welfare and well being; something in which the populace as a whole has a stake."According to the Random House Dictionary, Public interest is "1. the welfare or well-being of the general public; commonwealth. 2. appeal or relevance to the general populace: a news story of public interest."
Economist Lok Sang Ho in his Public Policy and the Public Interest(Routledge, 2012, published 2011) argues that the public interest must be assessed impartially and therefore defines the public interest as the "ex ante welfare of the representative individual." Under a thought experiment, assuming that there is an equal chance for one to be anyone in society, and thus could benefit or suffer from a change, the public interest is by definition enhanced whenever that change is preferred to the status quo ex ante. This approach is "ex ante" in the sense that the change is not evaluated after the fact, but assessed before the fact without knowing whether one would actually benefit or suffer from it. This approach follows the "veil of ignorance" approach, which was first proposed by John Harsanyi but popularized by John Rawls in his 1971 Theory of Justice. Historically, however, the approach can be traced to John Stuart Mill, who in his letter to George Grote, explained: “human happiness, even one’s own, is in general more successfully pursued by acting on general rules, than by measuring the consequences of each act; and this is still more the case with the general happiness, since any other plan would not only leave everybody uncertain what to expect, but would involve perpetual quarrelling….”(in Francis E.Mineka and Dwight N.Lindley (eds)The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume XIV - The Later Letters of John Stuart Mill 1849-1873 Part I, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul,Published 1972, Vol. XV, p.762, 1862.)
Problems with the ex post or consequential approach
The definitions of public interest based on the ex post or consequential approach are unavoidably debatable, leading to ambiguity and confusion.Based on the ex post approach, for instance, there are different views on how many members of the public must benefit from an action before it can be declared to be in the public interest: at one extreme, an action has to benefit every single member of society in order to be truly in the public interest; at the other extreme, any action can be in the public interest as long as it benefits some of the population and harms none. But these extreme views are clearly not very useful in practice, since most cases of public policy involve some people gaining and some people losing.
Nicholas Kaldor and John Hicks offer two alternative but related ways to resolve the problem. The basic concept is that the gainers must gain more than the losers lose. Kaldor stated that the gainers must be able to compensate all the losers and still go along with the change, if the change is in the public interest. Hicks stated that the losers must NOT be able to bribe the gainers from forgoing the change, if the change is good for the public interest. It is observed that the Kaldorian position, if the compensations actually take place, is no different from the Pareto improvement criterion for enhancing social welfare. But if compensations do not actually take place, with gainers merely "potentially compensating the losers," people will not come to a consensus and agree that the change enhances the public interest.
But it should be clear that some acts in the public interest can be bad for some individuals. There may be an agreement that some interests are unique to the public. Stephen Krasner, a political scientist used a similar methodology in his book Defending the National Interest. Krasner identifies cases in which no corporate interest is found in US foreign policy in order to identify and analyze a national interest. The ex ante approach to the definition of the public interest would encompass this.
Public interest law
According to Edwin Rekosh, Executive Director of PILnet: The Global Network for Public Interest Law (www.pilnet.org), "public interest law does not describe a body of law or a legal field; the term was adopted to describe whom the public interest lawyers were representing, rather than what matters they would work on. Instead of representing powerful economic interests, they chose to be advocates for those living in poverty. The term has grown, however, to encompass a broader range of activities of lawyers and non-lawyers working toward civil rights, civil liberties, women's rights, consumer rights, environmental protection, and 'fighting for the little guy'; - that is, representing vulnerable segments of society."Public interest law is widely understood as including at least civil representation through legal aid
Legal aid
Legal aid is the provision of assistance to people otherwise unable to afford legal representation and access to the court system. Legal aid is regarded as central in providing access to justice by ensuring equality before the law, the right to counsel and the right to a fair trial.A number of...
organizations and indigent criminal defense provided either by legal aid or the public defender
Public defender
The term public defender is primarily used to refer to a criminal defense lawyer appointed to represent people charged with a crime but who cannot afford to hire an attorney in the United States and Brazil. The term is also applied to some ombudsman offices, for example in Jamaica, and is one way...
(depending on the country). Other non-profit organizations that provide legal advice and representation to poor people also fall under the umbrella of public interest law.
United Kingdom public interest law
In law, public interest is a defence against certain lawsuits (for instance some libel suits in the United Kingdom) and an exemption from certain laws or regulations (for instance freedom of informationFreedom of information
Freedom of information refers to the protection of the right to freedom of expression with regards to the Internet and information technology . Freedom of information may also concern censorship in an information technology context, i.e...
laws in the UK).
Also, judges in common law
Common law
Common law is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals rather than through legislative statutes or executive branch action...
systems can make judgements on the grounds of public policy
Public policy (law)
In private international law, the public policy doctrine or ordre public concerns the body of principles that underpin the operation of legal systems in each state. This addresses the social, moral and economic values that tie a society together: values that vary in different cultures and change...
, a related term.
Public interest & the government
Public interest has been considered as the core of "democratic theories of government” and often paired with two other concepts, "convenience" and "necessity." Public interest, convenience and necessity appear first time in the Transportation Act of 1920 and also appear in the Radio Act of 1927. After that, these three concepts became critical criteria for making communication policies and solving some related disputes.Public interest & communication policies
Public interest is at the heart of many communication laws. To serve the public interests has been one of the main goals of communication policies.According to the Communications Act of 1934
Communications Act of 1934
The Communications Act of 1934 is a United States federal law, enacted as Public Law Number 416, Act of June 19, 1934, ch. 652, 48 Stat. 1064, by the 73rd Congress, signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, codified as Chapter 5 of Title 47 of the United States Code, et seq. The Act replaced the...
, SEC. 303. "Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Commission from time to time, as public convenience, interest, or necessity requires, shall-...(g) Study new uses for radio, provide for experimental uses of frequencies, and generally encourage the larger and more effective use of radio in the public interest."
The Telecommunications Act of 1996
Telecommunications Act of 1996
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was the first major overhaul of United States telecommunications law in nearly 62 years, amending the Communications Act of 1934. This Act, signed by President Bill Clinton, was a major stepping stone towards the future of telecommunications, since this was the...
requires the regulators must make sure all regulation is consistent with the requirement of "public interest, convenience, and necessity." (e.g. SEC. 251. INTERCONNECTION (2)(B))
See also
- Common goodCommon goodThe common good is a term that can refer to several different concepts. In the popular meaning, the common good describes a specific "good" that is shared and beneficial for all members of a given community...
- Condorcet paradox
- ConvenienceConvenienceConvenience is anything that is intended to save resources or frustration. A convenience store at a petrol station, for example, sells items that have nothing to do with gasoline/petrol, but it saves the consumer from having to go to a grocery store."Convenience" is a very relative term and its...
- National interestNational interestThe national interest, often referred to by the French expression raison d'État , is a country's goals and ambitions whether economic, military, or cultural. The concept is an important one in international relations where pursuit of the national interest is the foundation of the realist...
- NecessityNecessityIn U.S. criminal law, necessity may be either a possible justification or an exculpation for breaking the law. Defendants seeking to rely on this defense argue that they should not be held liable for their actions as a crime because their conduct was necessary to prevent some greater harm and when...
- Pareto optimality
- Radio Act of 1927
- Telecommunications Act of 1996Telecommunications Act of 1996The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was the first major overhaul of United States telecommunications law in nearly 62 years, amending the Communications Act of 1934. This Act, signed by President Bill Clinton, was a major stepping stone towards the future of telecommunications, since this was the...