Minimizing Missed Opportunities: Modeling Relationships between the State and Business in Russia

2009 ◽  
pp. 42-61
Author(s):  
A. Oleynik

Power involves a number of models of choice: maximizing, satisficing, coercion, and minimizing missed opportunities. The latter is explored in detail and linked to a particular type of power, domination by virtue of a constellation of interests. It is shown that domination by virtue of a constellation of interests calls for justification through references to a common good, i.e. a rent to be shared between Principal and Agent. Two sources of sub-optimal outcomes are compared: individual decision-making and interactions. Interactions organized in the form of power relationships lead to sub-optimal outcomes for at least one side, Agent. Some empirical evidence from Russia is provided for illustrative purposes.

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joelle M. Abi-Rached ◽  
Ishac Diwan

When comparing both GDP loss and mortality across countries, it appears that countries that have managed to save more lives during the Covid-19 pandemic have also managed to save their economies better. What accounts for these stark differences in country performances? In this article, we argue that a salient feature of economic and health performance is the degree of trust populations have in their governments. We set up a heuristic analytical framework that models this relation, under particular assumptions about what drives government and individual behavior, in order to better understand the mechanisms that may be at work. We identify three key roles that trust in government may play in enforcing social distancing policies, conveying credible information for individual decision-making, and shaping government attitudes towards risk. We argue that these implications are consistent with the empirical evidence. We also discuss the relevance of other forms of trust, namely, interpersonal trust and trust in science.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Bogert ◽  
Aaron Schecter ◽  
Richard T. Watson

AbstractAlgorithms have begun to encroach on tasks traditionally reserved for human judgment and are increasingly capable of performing well in novel, difficult tasks. At the same time, social influence, through social media, online reviews, or personal networks, is one of the most potent forces affecting individual decision-making. In three preregistered online experiments, we found that people rely more on algorithmic advice relative to social influence as tasks become more difficult. All three experiments focused on an intellective task with a correct answer and found that subjects relied more on algorithmic advice as difficulty increased. This effect persisted even after controlling for the quality of the advice, the numeracy and accuracy of the subjects, and whether subjects were exposed to only one source of advice, or both sources. Subjects also tended to more strongly disregard inaccurate advice labeled as algorithmic compared to equally inaccurate advice labeled as coming from a crowd of peers.


Author(s):  
Irena Carpentier Reifova ◽  
Sylvie Fišerová

This article proposes a theoretical framework for studying new media and its use by elderly people in risk society. Old people and their practices of new media use are discussed in light of the concepts of age cohort, generation and media generation. The article detects homology between individualization (a backbone of the second modernity as defined by Ulrich Beck) in the management of new risks and operation of new media language. Consequently, the concept of “double individualization of responsibility” is coined and connection is made to the effects of new media and new risks on ontological security. The argument is taken further onto the ground of critical gerontology, which claims that individual decision-making and fluidity of the second modernity is a source of insecurity and anxiety mainly for the old people. The article eventually presents the area of e-health as a research field for further exploration of how old people experience autonomy, individual decision making, and the absence of (or conflict with) external authority while dealing with the health risks on-line.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document