过程偏好:过程/产品的区别和消费者选择的调节

Douglas A. Kysar
{"title":"过程偏好:过程/产品的区别和消费者选择的调节","authors":"Douglas A. Kysar","doi":"10.2307/4093392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Three prominent interconnected trends - the equation of civic responsibility with consumer spending, the displacement of politically-determined regulatory policies by market-derived environmental, health, and safety standards, and the global integration of product markets - have been joined by a less well-recognized fourth: The struggle for control over consumer access to information regarding the processes by which products come into being. The aim of this Article is to identify and expand on this under-appreciated trend by, first, demonstrating the existence of a conceptual distinction between product-related information (e.g., whether a consumer good threatens to harm its user) and process-related information (e.g., whether a good's production harmed workers, animals, or the environment) as an increasingly prominent effort to resolve policy disputes that involve the entanglement of consumer regulation with broader social or environmental questions; second, showing that this process-product distinction is too thin and formalistic of a conceptual device to address such policy disputes in a stable or satisfying manner; and, finally, arguing more broadly in favor of acknowledging and accommodating consumer process preferences within theoretical frameworks for policy analysis, given the potential significance that such preferences may serve in the future as outlets for public-regarding behavior.","PeriodicalId":448271,"journal":{"name":"Employment & Labor Law Abstracts eJournal","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"89","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferences for Processes: The Process/Product Distinction and the Regulation of Consumer Choice\",\"authors\":\"Douglas A. Kysar\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/4093392\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Three prominent interconnected trends - the equation of civic responsibility with consumer spending, the displacement of politically-determined regulatory policies by market-derived environmental, health, and safety standards, and the global integration of product markets - have been joined by a less well-recognized fourth: The struggle for control over consumer access to information regarding the processes by which products come into being. The aim of this Article is to identify and expand on this under-appreciated trend by, first, demonstrating the existence of a conceptual distinction between product-related information (e.g., whether a consumer good threatens to harm its user) and process-related information (e.g., whether a good's production harmed workers, animals, or the environment) as an increasingly prominent effort to resolve policy disputes that involve the entanglement of consumer regulation with broader social or environmental questions; second, showing that this process-product distinction is too thin and formalistic of a conceptual device to address such policy disputes in a stable or satisfying manner; and, finally, arguing more broadly in favor of acknowledging and accommodating consumer process preferences within theoretical frameworks for policy analysis, given the potential significance that such preferences may serve in the future as outlets for public-regarding behavior.\",\"PeriodicalId\":448271,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Employment & Labor Law Abstracts eJournal\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"89\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Employment & Labor Law Abstracts eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/4093392\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Employment & Labor Law Abstracts eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/4093392","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 89

摘要

三个突出的相互关联的趋势——公民责任与消费者支出相等,由市场衍生的环境、健康和安全标准取代由政治决定的监管政策,以及产品市场的全球一体化——已经被一个不太为人所知的第四趋势所加入:为控制消费者获取有关产品形成过程的信息而进行的斗争。本文的目的是识别和扩展这一未被充分认识的趋势,首先,证明产品相关信息(例如,消费品是否有可能伤害其用户)和过程相关信息(例如,产品的生产是否伤害了工人、动物、(或环境)作为解决涉及消费者监管与更广泛的社会或环境问题纠缠在一起的政策纠纷的日益突出的努力;其次,表明这种过程-产品的区别过于单薄和形式主义,是一种以稳定或令人满意的方式解决此类政策争端的概念手段;最后,更广泛地主张在政策分析的理论框架内承认和容纳消费者的过程偏好,因为这种偏好可能在未来成为公众行为的出口。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preferences for Processes: The Process/Product Distinction and the Regulation of Consumer Choice
Three prominent interconnected trends - the equation of civic responsibility with consumer spending, the displacement of politically-determined regulatory policies by market-derived environmental, health, and safety standards, and the global integration of product markets - have been joined by a less well-recognized fourth: The struggle for control over consumer access to information regarding the processes by which products come into being. The aim of this Article is to identify and expand on this under-appreciated trend by, first, demonstrating the existence of a conceptual distinction between product-related information (e.g., whether a consumer good threatens to harm its user) and process-related information (e.g., whether a good's production harmed workers, animals, or the environment) as an increasingly prominent effort to resolve policy disputes that involve the entanglement of consumer regulation with broader social or environmental questions; second, showing that this process-product distinction is too thin and formalistic of a conceptual device to address such policy disputes in a stable or satisfying manner; and, finally, arguing more broadly in favor of acknowledging and accommodating consumer process preferences within theoretical frameworks for policy analysis, given the potential significance that such preferences may serve in the future as outlets for public-regarding behavior.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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