概括性与语境特异性:理论和政策的第一、第二和第三佳

R. Lipsey
{"title":"概括性与语境特异性:理论和政策的第一、第二和第三佳","authors":"R. Lipsey","doi":"10.1111/1468-0106.12220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Second-best theory established that a policy's effect on community welfare (or any other objective function) varies with its specific context. In contrast, Ng argues that fulfilling first-best conditions piecemeal is optimal whenever the policy-maker's information is insufficient to determine the direction of the change in the variable under consideration that will raise welfare, irrespective of the conditions in that market. It is argued in the present paper: (i) that Ng's own assumptions imply not that first-best conditions should be established under these circumstances, but that the status quo should be maintained; (ii) that when Ng's key assumption is altered to be empirically relevant, all policy decisions become fully context-specific; and (iii) that Woo's argument for accepting Ng's conclusions in spite of point (ii) is incorrect. The conclusion discusses valid uses of piecemeal welfare theory in spite of second best.","PeriodicalId":113748,"journal":{"name":"Public Economics: Publicly Provided Goods eJournal","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generality versus Context Specificity: First, Second and Third Best in Theory and Policy\",\"authors\":\"R. Lipsey\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1468-0106.12220\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Second-best theory established that a policy's effect on community welfare (or any other objective function) varies with its specific context. In contrast, Ng argues that fulfilling first-best conditions piecemeal is optimal whenever the policy-maker's information is insufficient to determine the direction of the change in the variable under consideration that will raise welfare, irrespective of the conditions in that market. It is argued in the present paper: (i) that Ng's own assumptions imply not that first-best conditions should be established under these circumstances, but that the status quo should be maintained; (ii) that when Ng's key assumption is altered to be empirically relevant, all policy decisions become fully context-specific; and (iii) that Woo's argument for accepting Ng's conclusions in spite of point (ii) is incorrect. The conclusion discusses valid uses of piecemeal welfare theory in spite of second best.\",\"PeriodicalId\":113748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Economics: Publicly Provided Goods eJournal\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Economics: Publicly Provided Goods eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0106.12220\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Economics: Publicly Provided Goods eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0106.12220","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

次优理论认为,一项政策对社区福利(或任何其他目标函数)的影响因其具体背景而异。相比之下,吴恩达认为,无论市场条件如何,只要决策者的信息不足以决定所考虑的变量的变化方向,从而提高福利,零碎地实现第一最佳条件就是最优的。本文认为:(i)吴立胜自己的假设并不意味着在这种情况下应该建立最优条件,而是应该维持现状;(ii)当Ng的关键假设被改变为与经验相关时,所有政策决定都变得完全具体到具体情况;(三)吴宇森不顾第(二)点而接受吴立胜结论的论点是不正确的。结论部分讨论了零碎福利理论的有效应用,尽管它是次优的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Generality versus Context Specificity: First, Second and Third Best in Theory and Policy
Second-best theory established that a policy's effect on community welfare (or any other objective function) varies with its specific context. In contrast, Ng argues that fulfilling first-best conditions piecemeal is optimal whenever the policy-maker's information is insufficient to determine the direction of the change in the variable under consideration that will raise welfare, irrespective of the conditions in that market. It is argued in the present paper: (i) that Ng's own assumptions imply not that first-best conditions should be established under these circumstances, but that the status quo should be maintained; (ii) that when Ng's key assumption is altered to be empirically relevant, all policy decisions become fully context-specific; and (iii) that Woo's argument for accepting Ng's conclusions in spite of point (ii) is incorrect. The conclusion discusses valid uses of piecemeal welfare theory in spite of second best.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信