Governmental Public Relations

C. Engel
{"title":"Governmental Public Relations","authors":"C. Engel","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.657001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Should government be allowed to spend tax payers' money on public relations? If one frames the question that way, the negative answer suggests itself. Yet government communication serves more purposes. These purposes may be analysed in terms of behavioural economics and psychology. In moral suasion, government communication is the governance tool itself. Most other governance tools do not automatically reach their addressees. Appropriate communication is necessary for them to become effective. Finally, government is a legitimate player in political process, and communication to the public is a legitimate element of this process. Specifically, the normatively desirable and the normative problematic aspects can usually not be fully disentangled. Hence, the potential distortion of elections must be outweighed against the governance effect. This paper does so by interpreting governmental public relations as a bundled product. It models the people as the principal, and the political parties running government as the agent. The distortion effect is observable, the governance effect is not. This set-up of the model invites a second-best solution in terms of mechanism design. Government is free to advertise. But advertising is costly in that it generates a handicap at the next elections. This solution is taken as a benchmark for discussing politically more digestible third and fourth best.","PeriodicalId":297504,"journal":{"name":"Legislation & Statutory Interpretation","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legislation & Statutory Interpretation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.657001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Should government be allowed to spend tax payers' money on public relations? If one frames the question that way, the negative answer suggests itself. Yet government communication serves more purposes. These purposes may be analysed in terms of behavioural economics and psychology. In moral suasion, government communication is the governance tool itself. Most other governance tools do not automatically reach their addressees. Appropriate communication is necessary for them to become effective. Finally, government is a legitimate player in political process, and communication to the public is a legitimate element of this process. Specifically, the normatively desirable and the normative problematic aspects can usually not be fully disentangled. Hence, the potential distortion of elections must be outweighed against the governance effect. This paper does so by interpreting governmental public relations as a bundled product. It models the people as the principal, and the political parties running government as the agent. The distortion effect is observable, the governance effect is not. This set-up of the model invites a second-best solution in terms of mechanism design. Government is free to advertise. But advertising is costly in that it generates a handicap at the next elections. This solution is taken as a benchmark for discussing politically more digestible third and fourth best.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
政府公共关系
应该允许政府把纳税人的钱花在公共关系上吗?如果一个人这样思考问题,否定的答案就会浮现出来。然而,政府的沟通服务于更多的目的。这些目的可以从行为经济学和心理学的角度来分析。在道德劝说中,政府沟通本身就是治理工具。大多数其他治理工具不会自动到达它们的收件人。适当的沟通是使其有效的必要条件。最后,政府是政治过程中的合法参与者,与公众的沟通是这一过程的合法因素。具体来说,规范性的可取性和规范性的问题性方面通常不能完全分开。因此,必须权衡选举的潜在扭曲和治理效果。本文通过将政府公共关系解释为捆绑产品来做到这一点。它以人民为主体,政党执政为代理人。扭曲效应可见,治理效应不可见。就机制设计而言,该模型的这种设置引发了次优解决方案。政府可以自由地做广告。但广告成本高昂,因为它会在下次选举中造成障碍。这一解决方案被视为讨论政治上更容易接受的第三和第四方案的基准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chevron as a Voting Rule Health Insurance Exchanges in Health Care Reform Legal and Policy Issues Equitable Balancing in the Age of Statutes Creating a Template for Banking Insolvency Law Reform after the Collapse of Northern Rock Unjust Laws and Illegal Norms
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1