How do colleges, universities, and student governments on campus get around the free rider problem? One key way is creating required student fees for many campus services. Student activity fees, technology fees, and other compulsory fees ensure that no one can free ride. The fees can be charged to everyone who registers for courses, or they can be charged to those who use them. Which approach is fairer? Which is likely to lead to better facilities? Which approach do you favor? Why?

QUESTION

Discussion: Interest Groups

How do colleges, universities, and student governments on campus get around the free rider problem? One key way is creating required student fees for many campus services. Student activity fees, technology fees, and other compulsory fees ensure that no one can free ride. The fees can be charged to everyone who registers for courses, or they can be charged to those who use them. Which approach is fairer? Which is likely to lead to better facilities? Which approach do you favor? Why?

In an initial post, share your perspective on the above. When responding to classmates, please fully express your position on the topic with scenario-based examples and in comparison to your classmate’s position. Be sure to respond to at least two of your classmates’ post in the discussion.

DO NOT WRITE MORE THAN 100 WORDS.

This is a discussion board assignments so when you finish the post, I will send you a post of two students to respond to.

ANSWER

Balancing Fairness and Facility Improvement: Approaches to Addressing the Free Rider Problem on Campus

In addressing the free rider problem within colleges, universities, and student governments, the implementation of required student fees has emerged as a key solution. These fees, such as student activity fees and technology fees, serve as a means to ensure that no one can simply benefit from campus services without contributing their fair share. However, there remains a debate regarding which approach to fee collection is fairer and more likely to lead to better facilities. This post aims to explore the fairness and effectiveness of two fee collection approaches and present my preferred approach.

Charging fees to everyone who registers for courses is a widely adopted approach. It ensures that all students, regardless of their level of engagement or usage of campus services, contribute to the provision and improvement of facilities (Economic Issues No. 33 – Educating Children in Poor Countries, 2004). This method can be seen as fair since it distributes the financial burden across the entire student body, reflecting a shared responsibility for supporting campus services. It eliminates the possibility of free riding, as everyone is required to pay their fair share regardless of their utilization of specific amenities.

On the other hand, an alternative approach involves charging fees only to those who directly use the services. This method can be seen as fairer in the sense that individuals are only required to pay for what they consume. It takes into account the principle of individual choice and allows students to opt-out of certain services they do not utilize (Bhidé, 2022). However, this approach may face challenges in accurately measuring usage and implementing appropriate tracking mechanisms, which could lead to administrative complexities and potential inequities.

When considering which approach is likely to lead to better facilities, both have their merits. Charging fees to everyone could potentially generate a larger pool of funds, enabling institutions to allocate resources for broader facility enhancements that benefit the entire student community. Conversely, charging fees based on usage might lead to a more targeted allocation of resources, ensuring that funds are directed towards the specific services and facilities that students actively utilize and value the most.

In my opinion, while both approaches have their merits, I favor the approach of charging fees to everyone who registers for courses. This method promotes fairness by ensuring equal contributions from all students and eliminates the possibility of free riding. It also simplifies the administrative process, as tracking individual usage can be challenging and may result in discrepancies and disputes. Additionally, this approach allows for a collective investment in the overall campus environment, fostering a sense of shared responsibility and community among students.

To illustrate this point, let’s consider a scenario where a university implements a usage-based fee system. Under this approach, students who heavily utilize certain facilities or services, such as the fitness center or library, would be charged higher fees (Mosadeghrad, 2014b). However, this could create a barrier for students with limited financial means who are unable to afford additional fees, limiting their access to essential resources. In contrast, charging fees to all students ensures equitable access and availability of services, irrespective of individual financial constraints.

In conclusion, while both approaches to tackling the free rider problem have their advantages, charging fees to everyone who registers for courses strikes a balance between fairness and effectiveness. This approach ensures equal contributions from all students, simplifies administration, and fosters a collective investment in campus facilities. By implementing this approach, colleges and universities can create a supportive and inclusive environment that benefits the entire student community, regardless of individual usage patterns or financial circumstances.

References

Bhidé, A. (2022, April 19). The Questions Every Entrepreneur Must Answer. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/1996/11/the-questions-every-entrepreneur-must-answer 

Economic Issues No. 33 – Educating Children in Poor Countries. (2004, April 29). https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/issues/issues33/ 

Mosadeghrad, A. M. (2014b). Factors Influencing Healthcare Service Quality. Factors Influencing Healthcare Service Quality, 3(2), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2014.65