Implementing the “Win-Win-Win Papakonstantinidis Model” as a Bargaining Solution Analysis for Local Government Decision from Territory-Community to “Behavioral” Community

L. Papakonstantinidis
{"title":"Implementing the “Win-Win-Win Papakonstantinidis Model” as a Bargaining Solution Analysis for Local Government Decision from Territory-Community to “Behavioral” Community","authors":"L. Papakonstantinidis","doi":"10.9734/BPI/MPEBM/V4/9362D","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Local development as a process of local management raises a variety of issues, most notably conflict resolution between the three power local poles: (1) the state and its nominated State periphery Departments; (2) local authorities; and (3) local people and their local movements/lobbies. Because the three poles are always negotiating, each of them should win out over the other two, resulting in the bargaining dilemma being introduced. As a result, it's necessary to define bargaining conduct. The proposed “win-win-win papakonstantinidis model” (derived from Nash win-win extended approach) aims to find ways for the three-pole bargaining conceptual equilibrium, under conditions,thus maximizing expected utilities for all the involved parts in local decision-making by the use of a combination of Descriptive Behavior (DB), Rational Choice, Instrumental Rationality, and the Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) methodologies, then an updating community’s behavioral state is expected, thus transforming the technical territory-community perception to a behavioral community perception, by sensitizing its population, towards the “guanxi relations” paradigm. Sensitization process should be concerned as a continuous process toward the limit of the absolute cooperation between local people in the community. On that case, the limit of the sensitization process coincides with the limit of the local development process and the limit of bargaining power pole convergence.","PeriodicalId":256488,"journal":{"name":"Modern Perspectives in Economics, Business and Management Vol. 4","volume":"133 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern Perspectives in Economics, Business and Management Vol. 4","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9734/BPI/MPEBM/V4/9362D","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Local development as a process of local management raises a variety of issues, most notably conflict resolution between the three power local poles: (1) the state and its nominated State periphery Departments; (2) local authorities; and (3) local people and their local movements/lobbies. Because the three poles are always negotiating, each of them should win out over the other two, resulting in the bargaining dilemma being introduced. As a result, it's necessary to define bargaining conduct. The proposed “win-win-win papakonstantinidis model” (derived from Nash win-win extended approach) aims to find ways for the three-pole bargaining conceptual equilibrium, under conditions,thus maximizing expected utilities for all the involved parts in local decision-making by the use of a combination of Descriptive Behavior (DB), Rational Choice, Instrumental Rationality, and the Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) methodologies, then an updating community’s behavioral state is expected, thus transforming the technical territory-community perception to a behavioral community perception, by sensitizing its population, towards the “guanxi relations” paradigm. Sensitization process should be concerned as a continuous process toward the limit of the absolute cooperation between local people in the community. On that case, the limit of the sensitization process coincides with the limit of the local development process and the limit of bargaining power pole convergence.
实施“三赢帕帕康斯坦尼迪斯模型”作为地方政府决策从领土-社区到“行为”社区的议价解分析
地方发展作为地方管理的一个过程提出了各种各样的问题,最明显的是三个权力地方极点之间的冲突解决:(1)国家及其指定的国家外围部门;(2)地方当局;(3)当地人民和他们的当地运动/游说。因为这三个极点总是在谈判,他们中的每一个都应该胜过其他两个,导致讨价还价的困境被引入。因此,有必要对议价行为进行界定。“三赢”papakonstantinidis模型(衍生自纳什双赢扩展方法)旨在结合描述行为(DB)、理性选择(Rational Choice)、工具理性(Instrumental Rationality)和应用行为分析(ABA)方法,寻找在一定条件下三极议价概念均衡的方法,从而使所有参与局部决策的部分的期望效用最大化,然后期望一个更新的社区行为状态。因此,通过使其人口对“关系”范式敏感,将技术领域-社区感知转变为行为社区感知。敏感化过程应作为一个持续的过程来关注,以限制社区中当地人民之间的绝对合作。在这种情况下,敏化过程的极限与局部发展过程的极限和议价能力极点收敛的极限重合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信