Final answer:
The question deals with the economic concept of voluntary contributions to a public good, exemplified by Yvette and Cho considering funding a botanical garden. This reflects the 'free rider problem' and involves strategic decision-making influenced by game theory, highlighting how private decisions affect the public good provision.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question revolves around the economic concept of voluntary contributions towards a public good, which is a topic covered in Economics.
Public goods are commodities or services that are provided to all members of a society, and which individuals cannot be excluded from using.
In the scenario given, Yvette and Cho are considering contributing to a botanical garden, which would be a public good because it is non-excludable and non-rivalrous—everyone can enjoy it without diminishing its value to others.
In Economics, this situation is often related to the 'free rider problem', where individuals may choose not to contribute to a public good hoping that others will, allowing them to benefit without paying.
Determining whether to contribute involves strategic decision-making and an understanding of game theory, as each individual's choice affects the overall outcome.
The provision of public goods is a classic example of a scenario where private interests may not lead to the socially optimal provision of goods and services.
Therefore, in this context, Yvette and Cho's decision on whether to contribute to the botanical garden is a practical application of these economic principles.