Pub Date : 2023-03-30DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.001
Hongkeun Yoon
This study aims to compare and analyze the public choice theory of J. Buchanan and E. Ostrom. Buchanan and Ostrom are in the same position in that they are based on the neoclassical economics‘ concept of man. However, differences are found in the concrete conceptualization of economic man. Unlike Buchanan's consistent adherence to the concept of the economic man as a utility-maximizer, Ostrom accepts the concept of the economic man, but in addition to it, he acts rationally in the long-term view through people's ability to learn and the process of trial and error. The ability to do is treated as a key variable. Although the two researchers explain the dilemma of collective action of economic human beings, it is also a big difference that they each hold the constitutional system reform theory and the self-governing institution as a solution to overcome it. The differences in their institutional solutions for overcoming the collective action dilemma seem to originate fundamentally from differences in research approach methodology. Buchanan develops the argument with the explanatory frame of a social contract between utility-maximizing seekers. Through an empirical case analysis of successful shared resource management cases, Ostrom present design principles of self-governing institution to overcome the collective action dilemma through an inductive approach. This paper aims to clarify how fundamental differences in research approaches lead to two different types of institutional solutions.
{"title":"Homo Economicus and the Theory of Public Choice: J. Buchanan vs. E. Ostrom","authors":"Hongkeun Yoon","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.001","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to compare and analyze the public choice theory of J. Buchanan and E. Ostrom. Buchanan and Ostrom are in the same position in that they are based on the neoclassical economics‘ concept of man. However, differences are found in the concrete conceptualization of economic man. Unlike Buchanan's consistent adherence to the concept of the economic man as a utility-maximizer, Ostrom accepts the concept of the economic man, but in addition to it, he acts rationally in the long-term view through people's ability to learn and the process of trial and error. The ability to do is treated as a key variable. Although the two researchers explain the dilemma of collective action of economic human beings, it is also a big difference that they each hold the constitutional system reform theory and the self-governing institution as a solution to overcome it. The differences in their institutional solutions for overcoming the collective action dilemma seem to originate fundamentally from differences in research approach methodology. Buchanan develops the argument with the explanatory frame of a social contract between utility-maximizing seekers. Through an empirical case analysis of successful shared resource management cases, Ostrom present design principles of self-governing institution to overcome the collective action dilemma through an inductive approach. This paper aims to clarify how fundamental differences in research approaches lead to two different types of institutional solutions.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121285098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-30DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.057
Seungmin Kim
Narrowly interpreted, broad ideas Adam Smith developed was simply related to founding father of economics. Those conventional way of thinking could lead his thoughts to fragmented cognition and/or misunderstanding on his works. This paper tried a comprehensive and contextual analysis on his ideas, categorizing them into ‘social institution,’ ‘unequality and justice,’ and ‘wealth and happiness.’ When his theology, ethics, jurisprudence, justice, and cognition on happiness are well connected, they can contribute to right understanding and correlations on his thoughts. For his ‘invisible hands’ to well activate, some conditions are necessary. Above all, it requires competitive market structure and sharing information over demand and supply. As governments grow rapidly, however, market competitions are disappearing, and worse, ‘visible hands’ are getting more powerful. Human society cannot stand exclusively on benevolence, or exclusively on coercion. It requires just law system and minimum level of material resources. In Korea, Marx’s slogan, rather than Smith’s, get more and more attraction among people. Relying on these, progressive plus leftist governments would emerge and retreat. They tried so-called ‘reforms’ via Non-Smithian logic and then fail and get situation worse. Normally, another leftist government comes to solve them, via more drastic leftist policies, and result in far worse failure. Smithian ideas are not target to drive out but are sound cure for the today’s Korea is to drive toward. 300 year old Smith is still alive in his good intellectual insight, which today’s Korea and world as well are eager to find.
{"title":"Structure of Adam Smith’s Ideas and Implications","authors":"Seungmin Kim","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.057","url":null,"abstract":"Narrowly interpreted, broad ideas Adam Smith developed was simply related to founding father of economics. Those conventional way of thinking could lead his thoughts to fragmented cognition and/or misunderstanding on his works. This paper tried a comprehensive and contextual analysis on his ideas, categorizing them into ‘social institution,’ ‘unequality and justice,’ and ‘wealth and happiness.’ When his theology, ethics, jurisprudence, justice, and cognition on happiness are well connected, they can contribute to right understanding and correlations on his thoughts. \u0000For his ‘invisible hands’ to well activate, some conditions are necessary. Above all, it requires competitive market structure and sharing information over demand and supply. As governments grow rapidly, however, market competitions are disappearing, and worse, ‘visible hands’ are getting more powerful. Human society cannot stand exclusively on benevolence, or exclusively on coercion. It requires just law system and minimum level of material resources. \u0000In Korea, Marx’s slogan, rather than Smith’s, get more and more attraction among people. Relying on these, progressive plus leftist governments would emerge and retreat. They tried so-called ‘reforms’ via Non-Smithian logic and then fail and get situation worse. Normally, another leftist government comes to solve them, via more drastic leftist policies, and result in far worse failure. Smithian ideas are not target to drive out but are sound cure for the today’s Korea is to drive toward. 300 year old Smith is still alive in his good intellectual insight, which today’s Korea and world as well are eager to find.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133168267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-30DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.149
Haeng-Bum Kim
Since Mises’ advocacy and Hayek’s refinement, ABCT(Austrian Business Cycle Theory) has been well formulated and showed valid explanation on actual economic business cycles as well. This article reveals how Public Choice responded to ABCT and how they developed its own ideas on business cycle. Gordon Tullock criticized Rothbardian sense of ABCT, followed by severe response from Sallerno. Some essential points on this argument were extracted to compare the basic difference of Tullock and Rothbard. ABCT activates business cycle when gov’t(central bank) ‘artificially’ lower the interest rate. Public Choice theorists focus on ‘why’ they do that. For ABCT, whether or not they have good intention is not important. PBCT, however, more emphasize that was done for the selfish political interests that politicians or bureaucrats have in political context. Austrians suggested new meaning to ‘bust’ phase of economic cycle, which under neo-classcical economics school long have been ignored as ‘bad’ event. ABCT assumes two key concepts; heterogeneity of capital, and mal-investment. PBCT is unfamiliar to those. So PBCT frequently does not identify the difference between over-investment and mal-investment, and assumes homogeneity of capital. It’s because Public Choice stands on neo-classical economics, not Austrian sense of economics. Then, four political business cycle theory(PBCT) models were reviewed: Opportunistic, Partisan, Rational Opportunistic, and Rational Partisan model. Austrians focusing on market process met Public Choice Theorists focusing political market met on the theme of business cycle. ABCT shows how ‘visible hand’ gives impact on market economy, and PBCT shows what impact business cycle has to political market. Each mutually gives sound tension, plus contributes to complementary explanation on overall business cycle.
{"title":"Public Choice School’s Response to Austrian Business Cycle Theory: ABCT versus PBCT","authors":"Haeng-Bum Kim","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.149","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.149","url":null,"abstract":"Since Mises’ advocacy and Hayek’s refinement, ABCT(Austrian Business Cycle Theory) has been well formulated and showed valid explanation on actual economic business cycles as well. This article reveals how Public Choice responded to ABCT and how they developed its own ideas on business cycle. Gordon Tullock criticized Rothbardian sense of ABCT, followed by severe response from Sallerno. Some essential points on this argument were extracted to compare the basic difference of Tullock and Rothbard. ABCT activates business cycle when gov’t(central bank) ‘artificially’ lower the interest rate. Public Choice theorists focus on ‘why’ they do that. For ABCT, whether or not they have good intention is not important. PBCT, however, more emphasize that was done for the selfish political interests that politicians or bureaucrats have in political context. Austrians suggested new meaning to ‘bust’ phase of economic cycle, which under neo-classcical economics school long have been ignored as ‘bad’ event. ABCT assumes two key concepts; heterogeneity of capital, and mal-investment. PBCT is unfamiliar to those. So PBCT frequently does not identify the difference between over-investment and mal-investment, and assumes homogeneity of capital. It’s because Public Choice stands on neo-classical economics, not Austrian sense of economics. Then, four political business cycle theory(PBCT) models were reviewed: Opportunistic, Partisan, Rational Opportunistic, and Rational Partisan model. Austrians focusing on market process met Public Choice Theorists focusing political market met on the theme of business cycle. ABCT shows how ‘visible hand’ gives impact on market economy, and PBCT shows what impact business cycle has to political market. Each mutually gives sound tension, plus contributes to complementary explanation on overall business cycle.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130205821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-30DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.033
Kyung-kuk Min
Even those who value political and civil liberties tend to ignore, or at least downplay, economic liberties. Among the modern philosophers who represent such a trend, the representative figure is John Rawls. He neglected the freedom to own the means of production and the freedom to contract as essential freedoms of a market society, on the grounds that they could not be conditions for developing and exercising “moral capacities”. In the just world he envisioned, extensive economic freedom is not allowed. The purpose of this article is to show, firstly, that severe restrictions on economic freedom endanger civil and political liberties as an institutional condition for the development of a sense of justice, on the ground that economic freedom is the bulwark of all freedoms, and especially that it is the soil of democracy. Secondly, a market society is by no means a society in which people act out of narrow-minded selfishness. People depend on each other to live. Equal freedom is what makes human interdependence possible. Only those who maintain the beneficial bonds of interdependence can succeed in the marketplace. Productive interdependence, facilitated by voluntary associations independent of politics, such as family, public life, moral, religious and business associations, is the source of innovation and entrepreneurship. When Rawls deliberately excluded economic rights from his basic rights list, the intellectual basis toward counter-free society were well settled, through which liberal-leftist redistribution became possible virtually with no limit.
{"title":"Why John Rawls’Theory of Liberty Neglected Economic Freedom","authors":"Kyung-kuk Min","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.033","url":null,"abstract":"Even those who value political and civil liberties tend to ignore, or at least downplay, economic liberties. Among the modern philosophers who represent such a trend, the representative figure is John Rawls. He neglected the freedom to own the means of production and the freedom to contract as essential freedoms of a market society, on the grounds that they could not be conditions for developing and exercising “moral capacities”. In the just world he envisioned, extensive economic freedom is not allowed. \u0000The purpose of this article is to show, firstly, that severe restrictions on economic freedom endanger civil and political liberties as an institutional condition for the development of a sense of justice, on the ground that economic freedom is the bulwark of all freedoms, and especially that it is the soil of democracy. Secondly, a market society is by no means a society in which people act out of narrow-minded selfishness. People depend on each other to live. Equal freedom is what makes human interdependence possible. Only those who maintain the beneficial bonds of interdependence can succeed in the marketplace. Productive interdependence, facilitated by voluntary associations independent of politics, such as family, public life, moral, religious and business associations, is the source of innovation and entrepreneurship. \u0000When Rawls deliberately excluded economic rights from his basic rights list, the intellectual basis toward counter-free society were well settled, through which liberal-leftist redistribution became possible virtually with no limit.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131870668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-30DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.125
Eun-hye Ju
The performance of publicness pursued by public institutions is difficult to present simply and clearly with a profit and loss statement such as the ‘bottom line’ used by private companies. Nevertheless, the current performance evaluation system of public institutions does not fully consider the characteristics of public projects and policies. Critical discussions are being raised in that it focuses only on the measurement of profitability creation based on short-term performance. Accordingly, this study conducted a meta-evaluation of the overall management evaluation system by applying the perspective of public value management to achieve the mission of creating public value, which is the essential purpose of the establishment and operation of public institutions. An overall review was conducted in terms of the content of public value management. The purpose of evaluation, subject of evaluation, management capacity, governance, performance, and implications for the direction of supplementation were drawn.
{"title":"A Study on Meta-evaluation of Public Organizations Performance Evaluation: Based on Public Value Management","authors":"Eun-hye Ju","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.125","url":null,"abstract":"The performance of publicness pursued by public institutions is difficult to present simply and clearly with a profit and loss statement such as the ‘bottom line’ used by private companies. Nevertheless, the current performance evaluation system of public institutions does not fully consider the characteristics of public projects and policies. Critical discussions are being raised in that it focuses only on the measurement of profitability creation based on short-term performance. \u0000Accordingly, this study conducted a meta-evaluation of the overall management evaluation system by applying the perspective of public value management to achieve the mission of creating public value, which is the essential purpose of the establishment and operation of public institutions. An overall review was conducted in terms of the content of public value management. The purpose of evaluation, subject of evaluation, management capacity, governance, performance, and implications for the direction of supplementation were drawn.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126549567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-30DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.099
S. Yoon
Based on the logic of Oates and Tiebout, the theory of public choice has long supported the competition among the local governments. However, the consolidation of metropolitan local governments has arisen as the possible solution to resolve various problems that are faced by local governments although it may lead to a lesser competition among local government. This article analyzes the expected financial outcome of the consolidation between Daegu metropolitan city and Kyungbook province. After such a consolidation, total revenue of local taxes is expected to remain constant, while the internal structure of tax and the political status of local government will change. Some areas that are now in Kyungbuk’s autonomous district but would belong to Daegu after consolidation are sure to suffer decrease in local grant revenues. Therefore, some special measures are necessary to supplement this financial loss. Special treatments will be required in general adjusted grants, local tax items, immunity from disadvantages imposition rule, and flexible operation of stipulated local grants rate.
{"title":"Analysis of Expected Financial Problems under Consolidation of Metropolitan Local Governments: In the Case of Daegu Metropolitan City","authors":"S. Yoon","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.099","url":null,"abstract":"Based on the logic of Oates and Tiebout, the theory of public choice has long supported the competition among the local governments. However, the consolidation of metropolitan local governments has arisen as the possible solution to resolve various problems that are faced by local governments although it may lead to a lesser competition among local government. This article analyzes the expected financial outcome of the consolidation between Daegu metropolitan city and Kyungbook province. After such a consolidation, total revenue of local taxes is expected to remain constant, while the internal structure of tax and the political status of local government will change. Some areas that are now in Kyungbuk’s autonomous district but would belong to Daegu after consolidation are sure to suffer decrease in local grant revenues. Therefore, some special measures are necessary to supplement this financial loss. Special treatments will be required in general adjusted grants, local tax items, immunity from disadvantages imposition rule, and flexible operation of stipulated local grants rate.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"108 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126591842","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-30DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.079
Ji Y. Son
For more than 2,000 years, Philosophers and scientists have been trying to find answers to how humans think intelligently. Artificial intelligence is a field of study that creates machines that mimic human intelligence, to this end, it is important to accurately grasp the mechanism of human intelligent thinking using scientific techniques. In the midst of such a process, the process of human learning ability, problem solving ability, ability to process very large amounts of changing and complex information and data, and reasoning ability has been partially identified. And, based on this information, research in cognitive science is developing around four aspects: Thinking Humanly, Thinking Rationally, Acting Humanly, and Acting Rationally. Research on artificial intelligence has converged into the field of legal artificial intelligence research from the perspective of research on human rationality and thinking and making decisions like humans. Furthermore, a field called Legaltech was formed. As such, as legal artificial intelligence research shows a movement to form an industrial area called Legaltech, a reaction in the existing legal area is also visible. One is the level of legal fairness regarding the use of legaltech technology, and the other is legal issues from the perspective that legaltech technology virtually replaces the work of lawyers. In this study, the current status of artificial intelligence and legal tech is examined in II, and the legal issues of the legaltech service and the 2021헌마 619 Constitutional Court decision are analyzed in III. Finally, in IV, the meaning and importance of rent seeking restrictions for Legaltech will be examined, and solutions to the legal issues will be sought.
{"title":"Legal Issues of Legaltech Industrialization and the Importance of Limiting Rent Seeking to Public Choice","authors":"Ji Y. Son","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2023.2.1.079","url":null,"abstract":"For more than 2,000 years, Philosophers and scientists have been trying to find answers to how humans think intelligently. Artificial intelligence is a field of study that creates machines that mimic human intelligence, to this end, it is important to accurately grasp the mechanism of human intelligent thinking using scientific techniques. In the midst of such a process, the process of human learning ability, problem solving ability, ability to process very large amounts of changing and complex information and data, and reasoning ability has been partially identified. And, based on this information, research in cognitive science is developing around four aspects: Thinking Humanly, Thinking Rationally, Acting Humanly, and Acting Rationally. Research on artificial intelligence has converged into the field of legal artificial intelligence research from the perspective of research on human rationality and thinking and making decisions like humans. Furthermore, a field called Legaltech was formed. As such, as legal artificial intelligence research shows a movement to form an industrial area called Legaltech, a reaction in the existing legal area is also visible. One is the level of legal fairness regarding the use of legaltech technology, and the other is legal issues from the perspective that legaltech technology virtually replaces the work of lawyers. In this study, the current status of artificial intelligence and legal tech is examined in II, and the legal issues of the legaltech service and the 2021헌마 619 Constitutional Court decision are analyzed in III. Finally, in IV, the meaning and importance of rent seeking restrictions for Legaltech will be examined, and solutions to the legal issues will be sought.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116549874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-31DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.145
Haeng-Bum Kim, Sung-kyu Lee
The ‘Public Choice’ represents an interdisciplinary field studied and researched by both economists and political scientists. Given the different perspective from which economists and political scientists view the same issues, different conclusions are likely to be reached. In other words, economists and political scientists are thought to disagree on many topical issues. In order to examine their disagreement or consensus on public choice topics, we made a survey containing 34 questions on various public choice issues to economists and political scientists. The survey finds a systematic difference in responses between two fields to many questions. Firstly, among the total 34 questions, the two groups exhibited “statistically significant” differences with 12 questions. Secondly, the differences between the two groups on the questions of normative beliefs were more systematic than the differences on the questions pertaining to the positive assumptions of the theory. Thus, opinions on ‘normative beliefs’ are more systematically differed than those on ‘positive assumptions’. Paradoxically, this result implies that the Public Choice needs interdisciplinary studies between two fields. To realize meaningful interdisciplinary studies of Public Choice Theory through close collaboration, it is imperative to make efforts to remove the fundamental differences in opinion between the two groups.
{"title":"Different Perspectives on Public Choice Issues between Economists and Political Scientists in Korea: A Survey Analysis","authors":"Haeng-Bum Kim, Sung-kyu Lee","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.145","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.145","url":null,"abstract":"The ‘Public Choice’ represents an interdisciplinary field studied and researched by both economists and political scientists. Given the different perspective from which economists and political scientists view the same issues, different conclusions are likely to be reached. In other words, economists and political scientists are thought to disagree on many topical issues. In order to examine their disagreement or consensus on public choice topics, we made a survey containing 34 questions on various public choice issues to economists and political scientists. The survey finds a systematic difference in responses between two fields to many questions. Firstly, among the total 34 questions, the two groups exhibited “statistically significant” differences with 12 questions. Secondly, the differences between the two groups on the questions of normative beliefs were more systematic than the differences on the questions pertaining to the positive assumptions of the theory. Thus, opinions on ‘normative beliefs’ are more systematically differed than those on ‘positive assumptions’. Paradoxically, this result implies that the Public Choice needs interdisciplinary studies between two fields. To realize meaningful interdisciplinary studies of Public Choice Theory through close collaboration, it is imperative to make efforts to remove the fundamental differences in opinion between the two groups.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"195 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114444687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-31DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.125
Seong-Jin Jeong
Essentially, fiscal decentralization is a matter for the governance, including local governments as well as fiscal authorities. In Korea, whether it is political, bureaucratic, or a matter involving the citizenry, no party truly yearns for fiscal decentralization. Yet, when it comes to every election, one can always hear hollow expressions about fiscal decentralization. This study aims to correct fallacies surrounding the awareness of fiscal decentralization. In South Korea, there has been an awareness that fiscal decentralization is a virtue, and that “20% autonomy” as a rhetorical phrase confuses the fiscal expansion of transferred funds from the central government with fiscal decentralization. Furthermore, balanced development is often confused with fiscal decentralization. If the tax revenue of the local government is over 80%, tax revenue decentralization and expenditure decentralization should be strengthened. If the tax revenue of the local government is under 30%, revenue decentralization should be guaranteed, while expenditure decentralization should be restricted. It is a false doctrine to claim that fiscal decentralization is workable without minimum autonomy and accountability established in local governments. Absent these requirements, fiscal decentralization remains an unattainable mirage. The reinforcement of autonomy and accountability should be the starting point and ultimate goal of a sustainable fiscal operation.
{"title":"Political Economy of Fiscal Decentralization in Korea","authors":"Seong-Jin Jeong","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.125","url":null,"abstract":"Essentially, fiscal decentralization is a matter for the governance, including local governments as well as fiscal authorities. In Korea, whether it is political, bureaucratic, or a matter involving the citizenry, no party truly yearns for fiscal decentralization. Yet, when it comes to every election, one can always hear hollow expressions about fiscal decentralization. This study aims to correct fallacies surrounding the awareness of fiscal decentralization. In South Korea, there has been an awareness that fiscal decentralization is a virtue, and that “20% autonomy” as a rhetorical phrase confuses the fiscal expansion of transferred funds from the central government with fiscal decentralization. Furthermore, balanced development is often confused with fiscal decentralization. If the tax revenue of the local government is over 80%, tax revenue decentralization and expenditure decentralization should be strengthened. If the tax revenue of the local government is under 30%, revenue decentralization should be guaranteed, while expenditure decentralization should be restricted. It is a false doctrine to claim \u0000that fiscal decentralization is workable without minimum autonomy and accountability established in local governments. Absent these requirements, fiscal decentralization remains an unattainable mirage. The reinforcement of autonomy and accountability should be the starting point and ultimate goal of a sustainable fiscal operation.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122423333","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-31DOI: 10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.001
R. Holcombe
Political capitalism is an economic and political system in which the economic and political elite cooperate for their mutual benefit. Rent-seeking is one of the mechanisms that the elite use to generate gains to themselves at the expense of the masses. Analyzing rent-seeking within the political capitalism framework yields insights about the rent-seeking process. There is a barrier to entry in rent-seeking process which reduces competition for rents and increases the return to the rent-seeking group. This produces a net gain that recipients of rents—the economic elite—share with the political elite for their mutual benefit. One result is that rent-seeking losses are smaller than would be possible in the traditional theory. When such limits on rent-seeking are ineffective and discriminatory, massive rent-seeking can occur which dissipates the benefits of rent-seeking and generates the kind of losses Krueger (1974) discussed in her classic article.
{"title":"Political Capitalism and Rent-Seeking","authors":"R. Holcombe","doi":"10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.55795/jpc.2022.1.1.001","url":null,"abstract":"Political capitalism is an economic and political system in which the economic and political elite cooperate for their mutual benefit. Rent-seeking is one of the mechanisms that the elite use to generate gains to themselves at the expense of the masses. Analyzing rent-seeking within the political capitalism framework yields insights about the rent-seeking process. There is a barrier to entry in rent-seeking process which reduces competition for rents and increases the return to the rent-seeking group. This produces a net gain that recipients of rents—the economic elite—share with the political elite for their mutual benefit. One result is that rent-seeking losses are smaller than would be possible in the traditional theory. When such limits on rent-seeking are ineffective and discriminatory, massive rent-seeking can occur which dissipates the benefits of rent-seeking and generates the kind of losses Krueger (1974) discussed in her classic article.","PeriodicalId":211752,"journal":{"name":"Korea Public Choice Association","volume":"42 1-2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122496773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：