In this paper, we analyze the link between effort and preferences for redistribution. If individ-uals hold standard preferences, those with higher ability exert more effort. Higher effort leads to a higher income. Individuals with a higher income oppose redistribution. Yet, under non-standard preferences, the link between effort and redistribution is not clear-cut. If aversion to inequity is sufficiently strong, even individuals with high ability may support redistribution. In a lab experiment, we indeed find that participants with higher ability are willing to help the needy if earning income becomes more difficult for everybody. To check whether this finding is externally valid, we use data from the World Value Survey. We do not find a significant positive effect of preferences for effort on preferences for redistribution, but we also do not find the significant negative effect predicted by standard theory. Also, in the field, those who have to pay for redistribution are not more likely to be opposed than the recipients.
{"title":"Effort and Redistribution: Better Cousins Than One Might Have Thought","authors":"C. Buch, C. Engel","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2046505","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2046505","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we analyze the link between effort and preferences for redistribution. If individ-uals hold standard preferences, those with higher ability exert more effort. Higher effort leads to a higher income. Individuals with a higher income oppose redistribution. Yet, under non-standard preferences, the link between effort and redistribution is not clear-cut. If aversion to inequity is sufficiently strong, even individuals with high ability may support redistribution. In a lab experiment, we indeed find that participants with higher ability are willing to help the needy if earning income becomes more difficult for everybody. To check whether this finding is externally valid, we use data from the World Value Survey. We do not find a significant positive effect of preferences for effort on preferences for redistribution, but we also do not find the significant negative effect predicted by standard theory. Also, in the field, those who have to pay for redistribution are not more likely to be opposed than the recipients.","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123066522","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}
Canada's unaffordable legal services problem: The Federation of Law Societies of Canada's text, "Inventory of Access to Legal Services Initiatives of the Law Societies of Canada," contradicts the law societies' duty to maintain affordable legal services. It considers the problem of unaffordable legal services as being one of mere "gaps" in the availability of legal services. And in the province of Ontario, in an expressly blunt contradiction of its statutory duty to "facilitate access to justice," the Law Society of Upper Canada's website states that the law society does not set fees for legal services, and it cannot reduce a lawyer's bill. Such publications tell the population that the law societies disassociate themselves from the problem of the unaffordability of legal services. If as a result, people were to think that the problem of unaffordable legal services must be the government's problem, the law societies would be quick to reject that solution as a violation of the principle of the independence of the legal profession. Then apparently, it's nobody's problem and duty.And therefore, in place of lawyers' affordable services, the "Inventory of Initiatives" text summarizes the law societies' greater use of programs of "cutting costs by cutting competence" by way of, self-help, law students and paralegals, "unbundling" of legal services, and lawyers' pro bono charity.The problem is causing four types of damage: (1) to the many thousands of people whose lives have been severely damaged for lack of legal services; (2) to the courts clogged with the very slow moving cases of self-represented litigants; (3) to the legal profession, shrinking instead of expanding to meet the ever-increasing need of the population for lawyers' services; and, (4) to legal aid organizations who provide free legal services to poor people, but whose funding governments fear to make adequate to meet the need for such services while the majority of the taxpayers cannot afford legal services for themselves.A democracy does not have to accept such poor performance and neglect from its law societies, nor the loss of its ability to make effective use of the rule of law and constitutional rights and freedoms. Therefore, to forestall the inevitability of government intervention, Canada's law societies have immediate need for some program in place that makes persuasive their claims that they are doing something of substance, beyond mere vague expressions of concern, to solve the problem. Now, they have nothing. But undertaking to improve the Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) to become a support-service providing legal opinions and related services to lawyers nationally, as has LAO LAW provided to Ontario's lawyers successfully for 35 years, would immediately show that they are taking action that will definitely have a substantial impact upon the cost of legal services. Otherwise, they will do nothing, or "too little, too late." Then government intervention will be
加拿大负担不起的法律服务问题:加拿大律师协会联合会的文本“加拿大律师协会获得法律服务倡议的清单”与律师协会维持负担得起的法律服务的责任相矛盾。它认为负担不起法律服务的问题仅仅是提供法律服务方面的“差距”之一。在安大略省，上加拿大律师协会(Law Society of Upper Canada)在其网站上声明，律师协会不收取法律服务费用，也不能降低律师的费用，这明显违背了其“促进诉诸司法”的法定义务。这些出版物告诉人们，法律协会与法律服务负担不起的问题撇清关系。如果结果是，人们认为负担不起法律服务的问题一定是政府的问题，律师协会将很快拒绝这种解决方案，认为这违反了法律职业独立的原则。显然，这不是谁的问题和责任。因此，“倡议清单”文本总结了律师协会更多地使用“通过削减能力来削减成本”的计划，通过自助，法律学生和律师助理，“拆分”法律服务以及律师的无偿慈善事业。这个问题造成了四种类型的损害:(1)成千上万的人的生活因缺乏法律服务而严重受损;(2)被自行代理的诉讼当事人进展缓慢的案件堵塞的法院;(三)法律职业不扩大不缩小，以适应人口对律师服务日益增长的需求;(4)向穷人提供免费法律服务的法律援助组织，但政府担心其资金不足以满足此类服务的需求，而大多数纳税人无法为自己支付法律服务。一个民主国家不必接受其法律协会的这种糟糕表现和忽视，也不必接受其有效利用法治和宪法权利和自由的能力丧失。因此，为了防止政府不可避免的干预，加拿大的法律协会迫切需要一些适当的计划，使他们的主张具有说服力，即他们正在做一些实质性的事情，而不仅仅是模糊地表达关注，以解决问题。现在，他们一无所有。但是，承诺将加拿大法律信息研究所(CanLII)改进为一个向全国律师提供法律意见和相关服务的支持服务机构，就像LAO LAW成功地为安大略省的律师提供了35年的服务一样，将立即表明他们正在采取行动，这肯定会对法律服务的成本产生重大影响。否则，他们什么都不做，或者“太少，太迟”。然后就需要政府的干预，以实施一种新的管理结构形式，这种结构比目前由加拿大法律协会提供的法律专业的自我监管更能对缺乏负担得起的法律服务作出反应。
{"title":"Access to Justice: A Critique of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada's Inventory of Access to Legal Services Initiatives of the Law Societies of Canada","authors":"Ken Chasse","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2439526","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2439526","url":null,"abstract":"Canada's unaffordable legal services problem: The Federation of Law Societies of Canada's text, \"Inventory of Access to Legal Services Initiatives of the Law Societies of Canada,\" contradicts the law societies' duty to maintain affordable legal services. It considers the problem of unaffordable legal services as being one of mere \"gaps\" in the availability of legal services. And in the province of Ontario, in an expressly blunt contradiction of its statutory duty to \"facilitate access to justice,\" the Law Society of Upper Canada's website states that the law society does not set fees for legal services, and it cannot reduce a lawyer's bill. Such publications tell the population that the law societies disassociate themselves from the problem of the unaffordability of legal services. If as a result, people were to think that the problem of unaffordable legal services must be the government's problem, the law societies would be quick to reject that solution as a violation of the principle of the independence of the legal profession. Then apparently, it's nobody's problem and duty.And therefore, in place of lawyers' affordable services, the \"Inventory of Initiatives\" text summarizes the law societies' greater use of programs of \"cutting costs by cutting competence\" by way of, self-help, law students and paralegals, \"unbundling\" of legal services, and lawyers' pro bono charity.The problem is causing four types of damage: (1) to the many thousands of people whose lives have been severely damaged for lack of legal services; (2) to the courts clogged with the very slow moving cases of self-represented litigants; (3) to the legal profession, shrinking instead of expanding to meet the ever-increasing need of the population for lawyers' services; and, (4) to legal aid organizations who provide free legal services to poor people, but whose funding governments fear to make adequate to meet the need for such services while the majority of the taxpayers cannot afford legal services for themselves.A democracy does not have to accept such poor performance and neglect from its law societies, nor the loss of its ability to make effective use of the rule of law and constitutional rights and freedoms. Therefore, to forestall the inevitability of government intervention, Canada's law societies have immediate need for some program in place that makes persuasive their claims that they are doing something of substance, beyond mere vague expressions of concern, to solve the problem. Now, they have nothing. But undertaking to improve the Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) to become a support-service providing legal opinions and related services to lawyers nationally, as has LAO LAW provided to Ontario's lawyers successfully for 35 years, would immediately show that they are taking action that will definitely have a substantial impact upon the cost of legal services. Otherwise, they will do nothing, or \"too little, too late.\" Then government intervention will be ","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133185224","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}
Theory suggests that the primary role of financial institutions and capital markets is to facilitate the allocation of resources in an uncertain environment across space and time. Therefore regulation of the financial sector has a crucial role to play, especially in the development of third world countries, most of whom have enormous wealth disparities between sections of their populace. A key objective of regulation is to redress information asymmetries that sometimes exist in financial services businesses usually to the disfavour of the consumer. Although most often the regulator is also the supervisor, the role of the regulator and that of the supervisor are. In most jurisdictions however, the powers to regulate and to supervise the activities of the financial services sector reside in the same institution. The regulatory framework of financial services often comprises primary regulation, secondary legislation and guidance and (policy) directives and directions issued by the regulator. This paper looks at the rationale for regulation, the different models of regulation in the financial services and what they are aimed to achieve. The paper also looks at the broad objectives of regulation even in the absence of a unified theory of financial service regulation, such as investor protection, ensuring fairness, reducing contagion, protection against malpractices and maintaining consumer confidence. The paper also analyses the pros and cons of single, twin-peaks and multiple financial regulator and why regulators need to be independent [but accountable] whilst at the same time avoiding industry capture. Although the paper discussed regulation broadly, it discusses financial services regulation in the context of the Malaŵian financial regulatory framework with a brief overview of the regulatory models in the United Kingdom and Zambia.
{"title":"Rationale of Regulating the Financial Services, Models of Regulation and Need for Regulatory Independence","authors":"Sunduzwayo Madise","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2538437","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2538437","url":null,"abstract":"Theory suggests that the primary role of financial institutions and capital markets is to facilitate the allocation of resources in an uncertain environment across space and time. Therefore regulation of the financial sector has a crucial role to play, especially in the development of third world countries, most of whom have enormous wealth disparities between sections of their populace. A key objective of regulation is to redress information asymmetries that sometimes exist in financial services businesses usually to the disfavour of the consumer. Although most often the regulator is also the supervisor, the role of the regulator and that of the supervisor are. In most jurisdictions however, the powers to regulate and to supervise the activities of the financial services sector reside in the same institution. The regulatory framework of financial services often comprises primary regulation, secondary legislation and guidance and (policy) directives and directions issued by the regulator. This paper looks at the rationale for regulation, the different models of regulation in the financial services and what they are aimed to achieve. The paper also looks at the broad objectives of regulation even in the absence of a unified theory of financial service regulation, such as investor protection, ensuring fairness, reducing contagion, protection against malpractices and maintaining consumer confidence. The paper also analyses the pros and cons of single, twin-peaks and multiple financial regulator and why regulators need to be independent [but accountable] whilst at the same time avoiding industry capture. Although the paper discussed regulation broadly, it discusses financial services regulation in the context of the Malaŵian financial regulatory framework with a brief overview of the regulatory models in the United Kingdom and Zambia.","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123104215","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 : 2013-10-01DOI: 10.1111/j.1465-7287.2012.00336.x
R. Burkhauser, Jeff Larrimore, K. Simon
A substantial part of the U.S. inequality literature focuses on yearly levels and trends in pre‐tax, post‐transfer cash income and its distribution over time and finds that median income appears to be stagnating, with income growth primarily coming at higher income levels. When we use data from the Current Population Survey for 1995–2008 and add the value of employer‐ and government‐provided health insurance coverage, not only does it increase the upward trend in the level of resources controlled by Americans, but also reduces the level of inequality in these resources and its upward trend. We then provide a highly stylized example of this broader income measure's value in capturing the impact of two key provisions of the Affordable Care Act of 2010 - an expansion in Medicaid and the provision of subsidies to lower‐income families for purchasing private coverage on state‐run exchanges. Even though these incremental expansions build on existing systems of government‐provided health insurance, we find that the vast majority of the benefits would still accrue to the bottom three deciles of the income distribution when we include the value of employer‐ and government‐provided health insurance in our expanded yearly income measure.
{"title":"Measuring the Impact of Valuing Health Insurance on Levels and Trends in Inequality and How the Affordable Care Act of 2010 Could Affect Them","authors":"R. Burkhauser, Jeff Larrimore, K. Simon","doi":"10.1111/j.1465-7287.2012.00336.x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7287.2012.00336.x","url":null,"abstract":"A substantial part of the U.S. inequality literature focuses on yearly levels and trends in pre‐tax, post‐transfer cash income and its distribution over time and finds that median income appears to be stagnating, with income growth primarily coming at higher income levels. When we use data from the Current Population Survey for 1995–2008 and add the value of employer‐ and government‐provided health insurance coverage, not only does it increase the upward trend in the level of resources controlled by Americans, but also reduces the level of inequality in these resources and its upward trend. We then provide a highly stylized example of this broader income measure's value in capturing the impact of two key provisions of the Affordable Care Act of 2010 - an expansion in Medicaid and the provision of subsidies to lower‐income families for purchasing private coverage on state‐run exchanges. Even though these incremental expansions build on existing systems of government‐provided health insurance, we find that the vast majority of the benefits would still accrue to the bottom three deciles of the income distribution when we include the value of employer‐ and government‐provided health insurance in our expanded yearly income measure.","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"119663491","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}
Standard cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is insensitive to distributional concerns. A policy that improves the lives of the rich, and makes the poor yet worse off, will be approved by CBA as long as the policy’s aggregate monetized benefits are positive. Distributional weights offer an apparent solution to this troubling feature of the CBA methodology: adjust costs and benefits with weighting factors that are inversely proportional to the well-being levels (as determined by income and also perhaps non-income attributes such as health) of the affected individuals.Indeed, an academic literature dating from the 1950s discusses how to specify distributional weights. And the current official guidance document for governmental CBA in the U.K. recommends their use. However, CBA scholarship in the U.S. has usually ignored the possibility of distributional weights. The prevailing wisdom, in the U.S., seems to be that the specification of weights is hopelessly “value laden” and that distributional concerns are best handled through the tax system. There is no history of distributional weighting in the U.S. government. Although CBA is now entrenched in the federal regulatory bureaucracy, via OIRA review, distributional considerations — let alone the specific device of weights — are barely mentioned in OIRA guidance. This paper provides a systematic overview of the specification of distributional weights. It shows, in detail, how to “put structure” on the problem. Two kinds of weights are described: utilitarian weights, which correct for the diminishing marginal utility of money; and isoelastic/Atkinson weights, which embody an aversion to inequality in the distribution of well-being itself. Both kinds of weights can be captured in simple and quite implementable formulas. Although the choice to adjust CBA with weights does involve a contestable ethical/moral judgment, that is equally true of the decision to use CBA in the first place — which remains intensely controversial outside the community of economists.The paper illustrates the effect of weights by applying them to the “value of statistical life” (VSL), capturing individuals’ willingness to pay for fatality risk reduction. Richer individuals have higher VSL values, and this creates a policy dilemma: CBA with income-differentiated VSL can benefit the rich at the expense of the poor; but CBA with undifferentiated, population-average, VSL may require the poor to pay more than they can afford for risk reduction. I show how the use of distributionally weighted VSL values can greatly mitigate this dilemma.The paper also dissects the “tax system” objection to the use of weights. Although distributional weights would be unnecessary in an idealized economy with a lump-sum tax system, real-world taxation is beset by imperfections (administrative costs, incomplete governmental information, divided government) that create a space for weights. To be sure, in using distributional weights to assess non-tax policies, gover
{"title":"Cost-Benefit Analysis and Distributional Weights: An Overview","authors":"Matthew D. Adler","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2313388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2313388","url":null,"abstract":"Standard cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is insensitive to distributional concerns. A policy that improves the lives of the rich, and makes the poor yet worse off, will be approved by CBA as long as the policy’s aggregate monetized benefits are positive. Distributional weights offer an apparent solution to this troubling feature of the CBA methodology: adjust costs and benefits with weighting factors that are inversely proportional to the well-being levels (as determined by income and also perhaps non-income attributes such as health) of the affected individuals.Indeed, an academic literature dating from the 1950s discusses how to specify distributional weights. And the current official guidance document for governmental CBA in the U.K. recommends their use. However, CBA scholarship in the U.S. has usually ignored the possibility of distributional weights. The prevailing wisdom, in the U.S., seems to be that the specification of weights is hopelessly “value laden” and that distributional concerns are best handled through the tax system. There is no history of distributional weighting in the U.S. government. Although CBA is now entrenched in the federal regulatory bureaucracy, via OIRA review, distributional considerations — let alone the specific device of weights — are barely mentioned in OIRA guidance. This paper provides a systematic overview of the specification of distributional weights. It shows, in detail, how to “put structure” on the problem. Two kinds of weights are described: utilitarian weights, which correct for the diminishing marginal utility of money; and isoelastic/Atkinson weights, which embody an aversion to inequality in the distribution of well-being itself. Both kinds of weights can be captured in simple and quite implementable formulas. Although the choice to adjust CBA with weights does involve a contestable ethical/moral judgment, that is equally true of the decision to use CBA in the first place — which remains intensely controversial outside the community of economists.The paper illustrates the effect of weights by applying them to the “value of statistical life” (VSL), capturing individuals’ willingness to pay for fatality risk reduction. Richer individuals have higher VSL values, and this creates a policy dilemma: CBA with income-differentiated VSL can benefit the rich at the expense of the poor; but CBA with undifferentiated, population-average, VSL may require the poor to pay more than they can afford for risk reduction. I show how the use of distributionally weighted VSL values can greatly mitigate this dilemma.The paper also dissects the “tax system” objection to the use of weights. Although distributional weights would be unnecessary in an idealized economy with a lump-sum tax system, real-world taxation is beset by imperfections (administrative costs, incomplete governmental information, divided government) that create a space for weights. To be sure, in using distributional weights to assess non-tax policies, gover","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"112 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125545961","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}
In French economist Serge Latouche’s 2009 book, Farewell to Growth, Latouche discusses “degrowth” in great detail, but he also explains how racial bias (and bias in general) in the world today has no place in a post-GDP world that embraces the principles outlined in “degrowth” or, as he calls it, decroissance. Latouche writes in Farewell to Growth that “we resist, and must resist all forms of racism and discrimination (skin color, sex, religion, ethnicity)”, biases he insist are “all too common in the West today.” Latouche’s ideas are important for considering “degrowth”, because racial bias and the historical problems presented by that bias, in the United States, continues despite efforts to address it in a significant manner. The World is Yours discusses “degrowth” , economic growth and racial inequality, seeking to not only provide a better understanding of the recent social, legal and political meaning of these terms, but also the difficulties presented by these ideas today in a world increasingly committed to economic growth, even at the expense of human existence. How can a new economic paradigm be pursued that is more sustainable? Will African-Americans and other groups of color and nations of color accept “degrowth” if the US begins to implement a real sustainable agenda that addresses racial inequality?
{"title":"The World is Yours: 'Degrowth', Racial Inequality and Sustainability","authors":"B. Gilmore","doi":"10.3390/SU5031282","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/SU5031282","url":null,"abstract":"In French economist Serge Latouche’s 2009 book, Farewell to Growth, Latouche discusses “degrowth” in great detail, but he also explains how racial bias (and bias in general) in the world today has no place in a post-GDP world that embraces the principles outlined in “degrowth” or, as he calls it, decroissance. Latouche writes in Farewell to Growth that “we resist, and must resist all forms of racism and discrimination (skin color, sex, religion, ethnicity)”, biases he insist are “all too common in the West today.” Latouche’s ideas are important for considering “degrowth”, because racial bias and the historical problems presented by that bias, in the United States, continues despite efforts to address it in a significant manner. The World is Yours discusses “degrowth” , economic growth and racial inequality, seeking to not only provide a better understanding of the recent social, legal and political meaning of these terms, but also the difficulties presented by these ideas today in a world increasingly committed to economic growth, even at the expense of human existence. How can a new economic paradigm be pursued that is more sustainable? Will African-Americans and other groups of color and nations of color accept “degrowth” if the US begins to implement a real sustainable agenda that addresses racial inequality?","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127084647","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 : 2013-02-01DOI: 10.4337/9781782549055.00016
J. Linarelli
The fairness of institutions of global economic governance ranks among the most pressing issues of our time. Most approaches to understanding the complex structure of treaties and intergovernmental organizations such as the WTO tend to uncritically accept an economic focus, highlighting gains from trade and the merits of progressive trade and investment liberalization. While the economic arguments are compelling, other ways of thinking about the roles of these institutions have received less attention. The Research Handbook fills this gap by offering a substantial interdisciplinary examination of the normative and policy underpinnings of the international economic order.
{"title":"Law, Rights and Development","authors":"J. Linarelli","doi":"10.4337/9781782549055.00016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782549055.00016","url":null,"abstract":"The fairness of institutions of global economic governance ranks among the most pressing issues of our time. Most approaches to understanding the complex structure of treaties and intergovernmental organizations such as the WTO tend to uncritically accept an economic focus, highlighting gains from trade and the merits of progressive trade and investment liberalization. While the economic arguments are compelling, other ways of thinking about the roles of these institutions have received less attention. The Research Handbook fills this gap by offering a substantial interdisciplinary examination of the normative and policy underpinnings of the international economic order.","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120955689","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}
Combating terrorism has become virtually the top most agenda of the international community as a whole and for any government in Pakistan as particular. This is not only because that eradicating terrorism is a part of international war on terror but also for an aim to overcome greater sense of insecurity and fear amongst the people of Pakistan for their uninterrupted, safe and secure social inter and intra-city movements. Academically speaking, it remains a matter of great concern that which of the social, political and global forces/factors affect and attract general masses and citizens to join hands of the terrorist organizations. There is a popular notion that poverty is a root cause of terrorist violence. Though this argument is propagated conversely by various scholars, many social scientists still connect poverty with terrorism quite staunchly. This paper investigates the ways in which terrorism is linked to poverty.
{"title":"Does Poverty Fuel Terrorism?","authors":"B. Siddique","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2184390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2184390","url":null,"abstract":"Combating terrorism has become virtually the top most agenda of the international community as a whole and for any government in Pakistan as particular. This is not only because that eradicating terrorism is a part of international war on terror but also for an aim to overcome greater sense of insecurity and fear amongst the people of Pakistan for their uninterrupted, safe and secure social inter and intra-city movements. Academically speaking, it remains a matter of great concern that which of the social, political and global forces/factors affect and attract general masses and citizens to join hands of the terrorist organizations. There is a popular notion that poverty is a root cause of terrorist violence. Though this argument is propagated conversely by various scholars, many social scientists still connect poverty with terrorism quite staunchly. This paper investigates the ways in which terrorism is linked to poverty.","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"174 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131853436","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}
The project deals with the co-relation between Dignity and Poverty. Impoverishment and undignified life go hand in hand and most of us don't even realize the direct co-relation between the both because this co-relation is institutionalized in our society. In this project I have tried to separate both the aspects and have tried to come up with a solution to make sure that the impoverished people also get their due share of respect and dignity irrespective of their economic status. I have also tried to distinguish between dealing with the issue of poverty and the issue of "dignity in poverty".
{"title":"Dignity and Poverty","authors":"Muzammil Hassan Choudhary","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2298289","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2298289","url":null,"abstract":"The project deals with the co-relation between Dignity and Poverty. Impoverishment and undignified life go hand in hand and most of us don't even realize the direct co-relation between the both because this co-relation is institutionalized in our society. In this project I have tried to separate both the aspects and have tried to come up with a solution to make sure that the impoverished people also get their due share of respect and dignity irrespective of their economic status. I have also tried to distinguish between dealing with the issue of poverty and the issue of \"dignity in poverty\".","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125950223","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}
I analyze the impact of the early 1990s state waivers from Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) guidelines to understand how changes in options outside of marriage affect household expenditures. AFDC waivers decreased the public assistance available to impoverished divorced women and thereby reduced a woman's bargaining threat point in marriage. Using the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX) and an empirical synthetic control approach, I find that decreases in potential welfare benefits altered the expenditure patterns of two-parent families. Waivers were associated with increased expenditure on food at home relative to restaurant meals and decreased expenditure on child care and women's clothing, suggesting greater home production and decreased consumption by women. Such changes are evident only for households containing a woman with a reasonable probability of receiving welfare benefits if her marriage ended. The changes in expenditure patterns suggest that reductions in a wife's outside options cause her utility within marriage to decline.
{"title":"Do Outside Options Matter Inside Marriage? Evidence from State Welfare Reforms","authors":"Dana Rotz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1960027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1960027","url":null,"abstract":"I analyze the impact of the early 1990s state waivers from Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) guidelines to understand how changes in options outside of marriage affect household expenditures. AFDC waivers decreased the public assistance available to impoverished divorced women and thereby reduced a woman's bargaining threat point in marriage. Using the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX) and an empirical synthetic control approach, I find that decreases in potential welfare benefits altered the expenditure patterns of two-parent families. Waivers were associated with increased expenditure on food at home relative to restaurant meals and decreased expenditure on child care and women's clothing, suggesting greater home production and decreased consumption by women. Such changes are evident only for households containing a woman with a reasonable probability of receiving welfare benefits if her marriage ended. The changes in expenditure patterns suggest that reductions in a wife's outside options cause her utility within marriage to decline.","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"185 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116376194","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：