{"title":"作为权力平衡的市场治理","authors":"Steve Vogel","doi":"10.1177/00323292231183834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay conceptualizes market governance as a balance of power and discusses the implications for current debates over antitrust policy. This framework offers a way to interpret and evaluate the “neo-Brandeisian” school that views concentrated market power as a threat to democracy as well as to economic goals, such as productivity and innovation. It suggests that the government can deploy antitrust policy to alter the balance of power to promote the public welfare without necessarily impeding competition or otherwise distorting markets. And antitrust policies that constrain market power can have the double benefit of making both markets and politics more competitive.","PeriodicalId":47847,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Society","volume":"51 1","pages":"319 - 336"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Market Governance as a Balance of Power\",\"authors\":\"Steve Vogel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00323292231183834\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay conceptualizes market governance as a balance of power and discusses the implications for current debates over antitrust policy. This framework offers a way to interpret and evaluate the “neo-Brandeisian” school that views concentrated market power as a threat to democracy as well as to economic goals, such as productivity and innovation. It suggests that the government can deploy antitrust policy to alter the balance of power to promote the public welfare without necessarily impeding competition or otherwise distorting markets. And antitrust policies that constrain market power can have the double benefit of making both markets and politics more competitive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics & Society\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"319 - 336\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00323292231183834\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00323292231183834","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay conceptualizes market governance as a balance of power and discusses the implications for current debates over antitrust policy. This framework offers a way to interpret and evaluate the “neo-Brandeisian” school that views concentrated market power as a threat to democracy as well as to economic goals, such as productivity and innovation. It suggests that the government can deploy antitrust policy to alter the balance of power to promote the public welfare without necessarily impeding competition or otherwise distorting markets. And antitrust policies that constrain market power can have the double benefit of making both markets and politics more competitive.
期刊介绍:
Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.