Avner de‐Shalit
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199240388
- eISBN:
- 9780191599033
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199240388.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, Environmental Politics
Many theorists are happy with democracy as a means to protect the environment; however, there is empirical evidence that democracy is not enough to guarantee environment friendly policies. This ...
More
Many theorists are happy with democracy as a means to protect the environment; however, there is empirical evidence that democracy is not enough to guarantee environment friendly policies. This chapter examines the economic arrangements (private vs. public ownership, decentralized and free market, centralized and planned production) that are more likely to protect the environment. It is argued that despite current scepticism, democratic socialism is best for the environment, although the case with public ownership of property is more complicated: it is more likely to protect the environment when the relevant ownership is of means of production, but not necessarily when the question is of the object that is being polluted.Less
Many theorists are happy with democracy as a means to protect the environment; however, there is empirical evidence that democracy is not enough to guarantee environment friendly policies. This chapter examines the economic arrangements (private vs. public ownership, decentralized and free market, centralized and planned production) that are more likely to protect the environment. It is argued that despite current scepticism, democratic socialism is best for the environment, although the case with public ownership of property is more complicated: it is more likely to protect the environment when the relevant ownership is of means of production, but not necessarily when the question is of the object that is being polluted.
RAPHAEL SCHAPIRO
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199260201
- eISBN:
- 9780191717352
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199260201.003.0008
- Subject:
- History, British and Irish Modern History, Economic History
This chapter presents a theoretically informed discussion on the origins and development of public ownership in Britain. It focuses on a period of history when different economic and political forces ...
More
This chapter presents a theoretically informed discussion on the origins and development of public ownership in Britain. It focuses on a period of history when different economic and political forces were operating, a time when municipalization and private ownership were both considered to be viable options. It argues that despite much contemporary and historical perception to the contrary, the inexorable absorption of infrastructure services by the public sector was more a product of agency problems than a function of the political complexion of government.Less
This chapter presents a theoretically informed discussion on the origins and development of public ownership in Britain. It focuses on a period of history when different economic and political forces were operating, a time when municipalization and private ownership were both considered to be viable options. It argues that despite much contemporary and historical perception to the contrary, the inexorable absorption of infrastructure services by the public sector was more a product of agency problems than a function of the political complexion of government.
Mark Thatcher
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199245680
- eISBN:
- 9780191715273
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199245680.003.0008
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Economy
This chapter shows why transnational technological and economic developments and regulatory reforms in the US failed to result in major institutional changes in France, West Germany, and Italy ...
More
This chapter shows why transnational technological and economic developments and regulatory reforms in the US failed to result in major institutional changes in France, West Germany, and Italy between 1965 and 1987 (just before detailed EU regulation began). Traditional institutional arrangements were highly protective of national suppliers in the mid-1960s, notably publicly-owned suppliers enjoying wide monopolies. During the 1960s and 1970s, suppliers faced major problems, including lack of investment and inability to meet demand. Existing institutions were widely regarded as inefficient and unable to meet transnational technological and economic pressures. Yet even modest reforms were blocked by a determined coalition led by trade unions, employees, and political parties. Instead, policies that did not require major institutional changes were used and/or inefficiencies were tolerated. Insofar as limited reforms were made, they widened cross-national contrasts, so that the two forms of internationalisation did not lead to institutional change or convergence.Less
This chapter shows why transnational technological and economic developments and regulatory reforms in the US failed to result in major institutional changes in France, West Germany, and Italy between 1965 and 1987 (just before detailed EU regulation began). Traditional institutional arrangements were highly protective of national suppliers in the mid-1960s, notably publicly-owned suppliers enjoying wide monopolies. During the 1960s and 1970s, suppliers faced major problems, including lack of investment and inability to meet demand. Existing institutions were widely regarded as inefficient and unable to meet transnational technological and economic pressures. Yet even modest reforms were blocked by a determined coalition led by trade unions, employees, and political parties. Instead, policies that did not require major institutional changes were used and/or inefficiencies were tolerated. Insofar as limited reforms were made, they widened cross-national contrasts, so that the two forms of internationalisation did not lead to institutional change or convergence.
Mark Thatcher
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199245680
- eISBN:
- 9780191715273
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199245680.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Economy
This chapter analyses how and why two forms of internationalisation — transnational technological and economic developments and reforms in the US — were met with institutional inertia, or at most ...
More
This chapter analyses how and why two forms of internationalisation — transnational technological and economic developments and reforms in the US — were met with institutional inertia, or at most limited divergent reforms in France, West Germany, and Italy between the mid-1960s and 1985. It shows that the two forms of internationalisation placed major pressures on traditional sectoral institutions that were very long-standing and protective of suppliers, such as public ownership of stock exchanges, legal monopolies, and the allocation of regulatory powers to governments and associations of brokers and exchanges. They led to debates in all three countries on modest reform proposals. Yet even limited alterations were largely blocked, due to the failure of governments to form a strong alliance with the leaders of stock exchanges that could overcome opposition to change. Instead, either poorly-functioning institutions were continued or non-institutional responses to internationalisation pressures were found.Less
This chapter analyses how and why two forms of internationalisation — transnational technological and economic developments and reforms in the US — were met with institutional inertia, or at most limited divergent reforms in France, West Germany, and Italy between the mid-1960s and 1985. It shows that the two forms of internationalisation placed major pressures on traditional sectoral institutions that were very long-standing and protective of suppliers, such as public ownership of stock exchanges, legal monopolies, and the allocation of regulatory powers to governments and associations of brokers and exchanges. They led to debates in all three countries on modest reform proposals. Yet even limited alterations were largely blocked, due to the failure of governments to form a strong alliance with the leaders of stock exchanges that could overcome opposition to change. Instead, either poorly-functioning institutions were continued or non-institutional responses to internationalisation pressures were found.
János Kornai
- Published in print:
- 1992
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198287766
- eISBN:
- 9780191596551
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198287763.003.0021
- Subject:
- Economics and Finance, Economic Systems
This chapter discusses the phenomenon of market socialism in the state sector. The practical changes involved in this constitute one of the major tendencies in the move away from classical socialism. ...
More
This chapter discusses the phenomenon of market socialism in the state sector. The practical changes involved in this constitute one of the major tendencies in the move away from classical socialism. Aspects addressed are ideological antecedents; the application of market socialism in selected socialist countries (Yugoslavia, Hungary, China, Poland, Vietnam, and the Soviet Union); alternative strategies for deregulation; the firm's vertical dependence; the softness and hardness of budget constraint, and the firm's responsiveness to prices; the affinity between public ownership and bureaucratic coordination; horizontal relations of firms in public ownership; the relative proportions of bureaucratic and market coordination, and the interactions between them; and the relation between publicly owned firms and the private sector.Less
This chapter discusses the phenomenon of market socialism in the state sector. The practical changes involved in this constitute one of the major tendencies in the move away from classical socialism. Aspects addressed are ideological antecedents; the application of market socialism in selected socialist countries (Yugoslavia, Hungary, China, Poland, Vietnam, and the Soviet Union); alternative strategies for deregulation; the firm's vertical dependence; the softness and hardness of budget constraint, and the firm's responsiveness to prices; the affinity between public ownership and bureaucratic coordination; horizontal relations of firms in public ownership; the relative proportions of bureaucratic and market coordination, and the interactions between them; and the relation between publicly owned firms and the private sector.
János Kornai
- Published in print:
- 1992
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198287766
- eISBN:
- 9780191596551
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198287763.003.0005
- Subject:
- Economics and Finance, Economic Systems
The first part of the chapter explains the general concepts involved in ownership. It then considers some of the characteristic forms of private property (private ownership) typical of contemporary ...
More
The first part of the chapter explains the general concepts involved in ownership. It then considers some of the characteristic forms of private property (private ownership) typical of contemporary capitalism, before going on to a methodical examination of property rights (public ownership) under the classical socialist system. This covers the state‐owned firm, other forms of state property, the co‐operative, and the very restricted scope of private property and private production.Less
The first part of the chapter explains the general concepts involved in ownership. It then considers some of the characteristic forms of private property (private ownership) typical of contemporary capitalism, before going on to a methodical examination of property rights (public ownership) under the classical socialist system. This covers the state‐owned firm, other forms of state property, the co‐operative, and the very restricted scope of private property and private production.
Eric T. Freyfogle
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780813124391
- eISBN:
- 9780813134888
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University Press of Kentucky
- DOI:
- 10.5810/kentucky/9780813124391.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, Environmental Politics
This chapter discusses the issue of land ownership, with particular attention to the distinction between private and public lands. One major difference between private and public land ownership ...
More
This chapter discusses the issue of land ownership, with particular attention to the distinction between private and public lands. One major difference between private and public land ownership resides in who has the final decision over how land should be used. Decisions about public lands are mostly made by public decision-makers. On the other hand, private owners have a greater say in land-use decisions, but lawmakers commonly play important roles. Despite this distinction, there are some overlaps between two forms of ownership, owing mainly to the fact that both are defined by law and, as such, should serve to benefit the common good. The challenge in attempting to get truly good land use is coming up with better ways of combining public and private interests on the same piece of land. In discussions on land ownership and property rights, the idea that private and public ownership are two distinct categories should be eliminated to create better land-management arrangements.Less
This chapter discusses the issue of land ownership, with particular attention to the distinction between private and public lands. One major difference between private and public land ownership resides in who has the final decision over how land should be used. Decisions about public lands are mostly made by public decision-makers. On the other hand, private owners have a greater say in land-use decisions, but lawmakers commonly play important roles. Despite this distinction, there are some overlaps between two forms of ownership, owing mainly to the fact that both are defined by law and, as such, should serve to benefit the common good. The challenge in attempting to get truly good land use is coming up with better ways of combining public and private interests on the same piece of land. In discussions on land ownership and property rights, the idea that private and public ownership are two distinct categories should be eliminated to create better land-management arrangements.
James Foreman-Peck and Robert Millward
- Published in print:
- 1994
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198203599
- eISBN:
- 9780191675881
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198203599.003.0005
- Subject:
- History, British and Irish Modern History, Economic History
Initially, local authority involvement was limited to the provision of railway track and by 1883 the local authorities owned one-third of the track mileage. The 1890s saw a rapid growth of electric ...
More
Initially, local authority involvement was limited to the provision of railway track and by 1883 the local authorities owned one-third of the track mileage. The 1890s saw a rapid growth of electric tramways in which the municipalities were heavily involved. This chapter explains this shift to public ownership at the local level and proposes two fundamental causes. First, market failure arising from economies of scale and externalities provided the initial impetus for public intervention. Second, the form of intervention was affected by the unsatisfactory experience with arm's length regulation and by the sectional interests of ratepayers who used the opportunity of intervention to further their own needs. Before any of these issues can be addressed, it is necessary to sketch out some of the background of the new utilities.Less
Initially, local authority involvement was limited to the provision of railway track and by 1883 the local authorities owned one-third of the track mileage. The 1890s saw a rapid growth of electric tramways in which the municipalities were heavily involved. This chapter explains this shift to public ownership at the local level and proposes two fundamental causes. First, market failure arising from economies of scale and externalities provided the initial impetus for public intervention. Second, the form of intervention was affected by the unsatisfactory experience with arm's length regulation and by the sectional interests of ratepayers who used the opportunity of intervention to further their own needs. Before any of these issues can be addressed, it is necessary to sketch out some of the background of the new utilities.
James Foreman-Peck and Robert Millward
- Published in print:
- 1994
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198203599
- eISBN:
- 9780191675881
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198203599.003.0008
- Subject:
- History, British and Irish Modern History, Economic History
The industries which were nationalised in the 1940s have been described as ‘basic’, a loose but commonly used phrase meaning no more than that they were part of the fuel and transport infrastructure ...
More
The industries which were nationalised in the 1940s have been described as ‘basic’, a loose but commonly used phrase meaning no more than that they were part of the fuel and transport infrastructure or were producers of major capital goods like iron and steel. Nationalisation means that all the assets associated with specific products or services are brought under public ownership. Many of the existing companies had substantial ancillary activities which were difficult to unscramble from the main line of business; hence whole undertakings were often acquired. The railways were nationalised and the new Railway Executive had a monopoly on all rail services. Nationalisation was thus associated with the sale of certain products and services under monopoly conditions which were enshrined in the nationalisation statutes.Less
The industries which were nationalised in the 1940s have been described as ‘basic’, a loose but commonly used phrase meaning no more than that they were part of the fuel and transport infrastructure or were producers of major capital goods like iron and steel. Nationalisation means that all the assets associated with specific products or services are brought under public ownership. Many of the existing companies had substantial ancillary activities which were difficult to unscramble from the main line of business; hence whole undertakings were often acquired. The railways were nationalised and the new Railway Executive had a monopoly on all rail services. Nationalisation was thus associated with the sale of certain products and services under monopoly conditions which were enshrined in the nationalisation statutes.
Ben Jackson
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- July 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780719073069
- eISBN:
- 9781781701454
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Manchester University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7228/manchester/9780719073069.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, UK Politics
An important feature of the ensuing debate about the nature of socialism was a renewed engagement with the ideal of equality. This chapter begins by examining the well-known debate in this period ...
More
An important feature of the ensuing debate about the nature of socialism was a renewed engagement with the ideal of equality. This chapter begins by examining the well-known debate in this period about the status of public ownership within socialist thought. It argues that this was primarily a debate about the mechanism that could best realise an egalitarian society rather than a disagreement over the meaning of ‘equality’ itself; there was in fact only minimal disagreement within the Left in this period about the meaning of such distributive principles. In contrast to some widespread perceptions of revisionist ideology, the chapter concludes that they were committed to an egalitarian, non-meritocratic view of justice.Less
An important feature of the ensuing debate about the nature of socialism was a renewed engagement with the ideal of equality. This chapter begins by examining the well-known debate in this period about the status of public ownership within socialist thought. It argues that this was primarily a debate about the mechanism that could best realise an egalitarian society rather than a disagreement over the meaning of ‘equality’ itself; there was in fact only minimal disagreement within the Left in this period about the meaning of such distributive principles. In contrast to some widespread perceptions of revisionist ideology, the chapter concludes that they were committed to an egalitarian, non-meritocratic view of justice.
