scholarly journals Municipal management in the south of Russia: managerial tools ensuring efficiency

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (Extra-E) ◽  
pp. 607-613
Author(s):  
Aleksandr V. Dyatlov ◽  
Vitaly V. Kovalev ◽  
Svetlana A. Tikhonovskova ◽  
Elena L. Kharitonova

To establish the potential opportunities to achieve more efficiency of municipal management in the theory and practice of using the tools of state managerialism. This article uses rational choice theory, which is based on the idea of three forms of capital: physical, human and social. These forms are transformed into a set of resources used by the actor to achieve the goal in the process of choosing the most rational alternative. There was the research and presentation of its results on the third empirical indicator. The empirical research was carried out for the practical use of the developed theoretical model. Substantively this research will focus on such aspects of the activities of self-governments as work for indicators, management in the form of service delivery, restructuring of government bodies, effectiveness of interaction with civic activists and business communities.

Legal Theory ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Knight ◽  
Douglass North

Economic theory is built on assumptions about human behavior—assumptions embodied in rational-choice theory. Underlying these assumptions are implicit notions about how we think and learn. These implicit notions are fundamentally important to social explanation. The very plausibility of the explanations that we develop out of rational-choice theory rests crucially on the accuracy of these notions about cognition and rationality. But there is a basic problem: There is often very little relationship between the assumptions that rational-choice theorists make and the way that humans actually act and learn in everyday life. This has significant implications for economic theory and practice. It leads to bad theories and inadequate explanations; it produces bad predictions and, thus, supports ineffective social policies.


2015 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojan Krstic ◽  
Milos Krstic

In this paper, we have tried to explain the normative turn in more recent work on experimental economics and behavioral economics. In section two, we discussed the various arguments that philosophers have offered in related to a normative interpretation of rational choice theory. We used the Friedman-Savage work on Expected Utility Theory as an example of the differences between the way that economists and philosophers see rational choice theory. We concluded that economists have traditionally equated the normative with ethically. In the third part, we examined the results of experimental and behaviorial economic literature with emphasis on the influence of experimental psychology. We presented a number of empirical anomalies and we agreed that representatives of economic psychology tend to view rational choice theory as a normative theory of rationality. In the last part, we examined some of the causes and consequences of the normative turn.


2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 330-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dylan Riley

What was the connection between the structure of the German economy in the 1930s and German aggression in World War ii? Adam Tooze’s Wages of Destruction forcefully poses this issue, but fails to adequately resolve it. Instead, on this decisive question, his analysis oscillates uneasily between two equally unconvincing models: rational-choice theory and cultural determinism. This surprising explanatory failure derives from an inadequate theorisation of German imperialism as the expression of the combined and uneven development of the German economy and society in the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries.


2007 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Learry Gagné

English Jon Elster has suggested that social norm compliance cannot be explained using rational-choice theory alone, as it also involves emotional motivations. We propose to expand on this proposition by adding another extra-rational aspect. According to Pierre Bourdieu, non-rational compliance earns greater group approval than interested compliance. We model this insight by stating that social norms contain an injunction not to comply rationally. The article begins with a study of motivations underlying social norm compliance, including “hypocritical compliance”, or rational compliance disguised as sincere and disinterested. This part is followed by a critique of the “economy of esteem” model. We introduce in the third part the concept of “hypocritical equilibrium”, in which most agents pretend to comply non-rationally while feigning not to notice that most others do the same. This kind of equilibrium is sustained by esteem-seeking and self-deception. The fourth part is an application of our model to dueling norms. We then conclude by looking at alternative models. Our aim is to show that, in social norm compliance, taking motivations seriously can yield explanations that strict rational-choice models cannot produce. French Selon Jon Elster, le conformisme aux normes sociales ne peut pas s’expliquer uniquement par la théorie du choix rationnel, car il met en jeu des motivations de nature émotionnelle. Nous proposons d’aller au delà de cette proposition en y ajoutant un autre aspect en dehors de la rationalité. Pour Pierre Bourdieu, le conformisme non rationnel est mieux accepté par le groupe que le conformisme intéressé. Nous modélisons cette idée en stipulant que les normes sociales contiennent une injonction à ne pas agir de façon rationnelle. L’article commence par une étude des motivations qui sous-tendent le conformisme aux normes sociales, y compris le “conformisme hypocrite”, qui est un conformisme rationnel déguisé en conformisme désintéressé. Nous présentons ensuite une critique du modèle de l’“économie de l’estime”. Dans la troisième partie, nous introduisons le concept d’“équilibre hypocrite”, où la plupart des agents font semblant de se conformer de manière désintéressée tout en ignorant délibérément les comportements semblables d’autrui. Ce genre d’équilibre se maintient par la recherche d’estime et l’illusion sur soi-même. Dans la quatrième partie, nous appliquons notre modèle aux normes régissant le duel, et nous concluons avec un survol de modèles alternatifs. Notre but est de montrer que, dans le champ normatif, prendre les motivations au sérieux peut nous offrir des explications que les modèles rationnels stricts ne peuvent donner.


OUGHTOPIA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-282
Author(s):  
In-Kyun Kim ◽  
Myeong-Geon Koh

Author(s):  
Kealeboga J Maphunye

This article examines South Africa's 20-year democracy by contextualising the roles of the 'small' political parties that contested South Africa's 2014 elections. Through the  prism  of South  Africa's  Constitution,  electoral legislation  and the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, it examines these parties' roles in South Africa's democratisation; their influence,  if any, in parliament, and whether they play any role in South Africa's continental or international engagements. Based on a review of the extant literature, official documents,  legislation, media, secondary research, reports and the results of South Africa's elections, the article relies on game theory, rational choice theory and theories of democracy and democratic consolidation to examine 'small' political parties' roles in the country's political and legal systems. It concludes that the roles of 'small' parties in governance and democracy deserve greater recognition than is currently the case, but acknowledges the extreme difficulty experienced by the 'small'  parties in playing a significant role in democratic consolidation, given their formidable opponent in a one-party dominant system.


Author(s):  
Michael Moehler

This chapter discusses contractualist theories of justice that, although they rely explicitly on moral assumptions in the traditional understanding of morality, employ rational choice theory for the justification of principles of justice. In particular, the chapter focuses on the dispute between Rawls and Harsanyi about the correct choice of principles of justice in the original position. The chapter shows that there is no winner in the Rawls–Harsanyi dispute and, ultimately, formal methods alone cannot justify moral principles. This finding is significant for the development of the rational decision situation that serves for the derivation of the weak principle of universalization for the domain of pure instrumental morality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document