Suchergebnisse

The currently accepted theory of collective action presumes that individuals are helplessly trapped in social dilemmas. This has led to a form of policy analysis that presumes external authorities must solve all collective‐action problems. The presumed universal need for externally implemented incentives is based, however, on a single model of rational behavior. This model has been shown to be an inadequate foundation to explain extensive empirical findings from the field and the experimental laboratory related to nonmarket settings. Thus, it is necessary to adopt a broader theory of human behavior that posits multiple types of individuals – including rational egoists as well as conditional cooperators – and examines how the contexts of collective action affect the mix of individuals involved. I will briefly review the empirical evidence related to intrinsic motivations and how external incentives may crowd out or crowd in behaviors that are based on intrinsic preferences. I then discuss the delicate problem of designing institutions that enhance citizenship rather than crowding it out. The penchant for neat, orderly hierarchical systems needs to be replaced with a recognition that complex, polycentric systems are needed to cope effectively with complex problems of modern life and to give all citizens a more effective role in the governance of democratic societies.

In this groundbreaking analysis, Marco Portales examines the way in which education and the media act as immobilizing social forces to shape the Latino world that exists despite the best efforts of many Mexican Americans and other Latinos. The delicate relationships between what Latinos are and what they seem to be, as perceived both by the larger society and by Latinos themselves, create and craft a culture that students of American culture have not sufficiently studied or understood. As bandidos or gigolos, drug users or unwed mothers, Latinos continue to figure in the public consciousness p

'Der Beitrag diskutiert die Plausibilität der These des 'crowding out', nach der der Ausbau sozialstaatlicher Leistungen familiale Unterstützungsleistungen und familiale Solidarität verdrängen würde. In einer theoretischen Erörterung der Motive für private intergenerationelle Unterstützungsleistungen wird herausgearbeitet, das ein crowding out theoretisch zwar möglich, insgesamt betrachtet aber empirisch unwahrscheinlich ist, da gegenläufige Effekte des crowding in eine höhere Plausibilität haben. Mit Hilfe eines Ländervergleichs wird anschließend untersucht, ob sich die Anteile der Hilfen, die die Älteren von ihren Kindern erhalten, systematisch mit Blick auf das Niveau der wohlfahrtsstaatlichen Versorgung unterscheiden, wie es der These des crowding out entsprechen würde. Die deskriptiven empirischen Befunde sprechen jedoch ebenfalls gegen diese These.' (Autorenreferat)