The Experts below are selected from a list of 3720 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
David B. Spence - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a public choice Progressivism continued
2002Co-Authors: David B. SpenceAbstract:It is a widely held belief among legal scholars that public choice scholarship promotes a cynical view of politics and law, and of the administrative state in particular. In a recent article, I argued (along with my coauthor, Frank Cross) that while public choice scholarship may seem hostile to the delegation of policymaking authority to administrative agencies, public choice is not by nature anti-delegation. To illustrate this point, we offered a neo-Progressive defense of delegation expressed in public choice terms. Using a simple formal model, we demonstrated why rational voters might prefer delegation, and why that preference is consistent with our Constitutional design. Of course, our argument did not resolve the longstanding disputes over the wisdom of either delegation or public choice theory: both have plenty of critics. In this essay, I will try to build upon on that earlier argument in two ways: first, by examining the roots of some legal scholars' dissatisfaction with economic models of delegation; and second, by offering additional examples of how non-cynical administrative law scholars might use public choice insights to further support the case for delegation.
-
A public choice Progressivism, continued
2001Co-Authors: David B. SpenceAbstract:It is a widely held belief among legal scholars that public choice scholarship promotes a cynical view of politics and law, and of the administrative state in particular. In a recent article (Geo. L. J., 2000), Frank Cross and I offered a neo-Progressive defense of delegation expressed in public choice terms. Using a simple formal model, we demonstrated why rational voters might prefer delegation, and why that preference is consistent with our Constitutional design. Of course, our argument did not resolve the longstanding disputes over the wisdom of either delegation or public choice theory: both have plenty of critics. In this essay, I build upon on that earlier argument in two ways. In Part I of this essay, I examine the roots of some legal scholars' dissatisfaction with economic models in administrative law, and conclude that it is the product of longstanding scholarly disputes over analytical goals and methods, disputes that become further complicated when social science analyses are imported into a discipline (legal scholarship) that does not classify itself as a science at all. In Part II of the essay, I build on our earlier analysis by offering additional examples of how administrative law scholars might use public choice insights to further support the case for delegation. I note that while both the legislative process and the administrative process can be undemocratic (in the Arrovian sense), the latter is less susceptible to manipulation by special interests than the former. This is true not because bureaucrats are more selfless than politicians, but because of the different structures of the two decision processes.
Cass R Sunstein - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a new Progressivism
2006Co-Authors: Cass R SunsteinAbstract:Based on an address for a conference on Law and Transformation in South Africa, this paper explores problems with two twentieth-century approaches to government: the way of markets and the way of planning. It urge that the New Progressivism simultaneously offers (1) a distinctive conception of government’s appropriate means, an outgrowth of the late-twentieth-century critique of economic planning, and (2) a distinctive understanding of government’s appropriate ends, an outgrowth of evident failures with market arrangements and largely a product of the mid-twentieth-century critique of laissez faire. It emphasizes the need to replace bans and commands with appropriate incentives, and to attend to social norms and social meanings in leading human behavior in welfare-promoting directions. The ultimate goal is to promote some of the goals associated with America’s New Deal and Europe’s social democracy, but without using the crude, inflexible, and often counterproductive methods associated with those approaches. Some attention is devoted to the effects of globalization, the AIDS crisis, crime prevention, and the role of economic growth. Introduction: Means and Ends The German psychologist Dietrich Dorner has done some fascinating experiments designed to see whether people can engage in successful social engineering. Dorner’s experiments are run via computer. Participants are asked to solve problems faced by the inhabitants of some region of the world; the problems may involve poverty, poor medical care, inadequate fertilization of crops, sick cattle, insufficient water, or excessive hunting and fishing. Through the magic of the computer, many policy initiatives are available (improved care of cattle, childhood immunization, drilling more wells), and participants can choose among them. Once particular initiatives are chosen, the computer projects, over short periods and then over decades, what is likely to happen in the region. In these experiments, success is entirely possible; some initiatives will actually make for effective and enduring improvements. But most of the participants—even the most educated and professional ones—produce calamities. They do so because * This paper is based on a keynote address on a conference on Law and Transformation in South Africa; readers are asked to make allowances for a paper originally intended for oral presentation. I am grateful to Lesley Wexler for superb research assistance and to Martha Nussbaum and Theunis Roux for many helpful comments and discussions. 1 Dietrich Dorner, The Logic of Failure (1997).
-
a new Progressivism
2005Co-Authors: Cass R SunsteinAbstract:Based on an address for a conference on Law and Transformation in South Africa, this paper explores problems with two twentieth-century approaches to government: the way of markets and the way of planning. It urges that the New Progressivism simultaneously offers (1) a distinctive conception of government's appropriate means, an outgrowth of the late-twentieth-century critique of economic planning, and (2) a distinctive understanding of government's appropriate ends, an outgrowth of evident failures with market arrangements and largely a product of the mid-twentieth-century critique of laissez faire. It emphasizes the need to replace bans and commands with appropriate incentives, and to attend to social norms and social meanings in leading human behavior in welfare-promoting directions. The ultimate goal is to promote some of the goals associated with America's New Deal and Europe's social democracy, but without using the crude, inflexible, and often counterproductive methods associated with those approaches. Some attention is devoted to the effects of globalization, the AIDS crisis, crime prevention, and the role of economic growth.
Luca Fiorito - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
between Progressivism and institutionalism albert benedict wolfe on eugenics
2013Co-Authors: Luca FioritoAbstract:Albeit concerned with the biological element in social evolution, Albert B. Wolfe was among the very few economists of the progressive era who openly expressed their concerns about certain implications of eugenic rhetoric for the social science. Specifically, Wolfe questioned the strong hereditary boundaries that more extreme eugenicists suggested about human beings. A careful examination of Wolfe’s writings reveals that his reaction was rooted in the belief that many of the social problems that eugenicists attributed to hereditary limitations were actually imputable to the influence that the social, economic, and physical environment exercised on the individuals.
-
between Progressivism and institutionalism albert benedict wolfe on eugenics
2012Co-Authors: Luca FioritoAbstract:Albeit concerned with the biological element in social evolution, Albert B. Wolfe was among the very few economists of the progressive era who openly expressed his concerns about certain implications of eugenic rhetoric for the social science. Specifically, Wolfe questioned the strong hereditary boundaries that more extreme eugenicists suggested about human beings. As I will attempt to show in paper, a careful examination of Wolfe’s writings reveals that his reaction was rooted in the belief that many of the social problems which eugenicists attributed to hereditary limitations, were actually imputable to the influence that the social, economic, and physical environment exercised on the individuals.
Manzo, Robert Michael - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The development of public libraries in Progressive-Era North Carolina, 1896-1929
2020Co-Authors: Manzo, Robert Michael, Nc Docks At Western Carolina UniversityAbstract:My research traces the history of one type of educational institution in North Carolina from the beginning to the end of the Southern progressive movement. Progressivism was a national movement that re-interpreted the role of the state in the nation’s economic and social life. Reformers as different as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson espoused a theory ofpositive government, meaning that government had a responsibility to meet more than just thebasic needs of citizens. As a result, the administrative bureaucracy of government at all levels — federal, state, county, and city— grew to unprecedented size during the first quarter of the twentieth century. New agencies, commissions, and boards exercised new or expanded controlover such matters as public health, education, interstate trade, and road construction. Althoughthe liberal social-justice ideals of Progressivism were somewhat restrained in the traditionally conservative Southern states, they still had a transformative impact. With efficiency and expertise as the guiding keywords of the era, a proliferation of government and voluntary organizations developed detailed strategic plans to address a range of social and economic problems. Public libraries were one such organization. They were supported by civic clubs, operated under the auspices of government, dedicated to serving citizens’ educational needs, and managed by experts in the novel discipline of library science. Using the interpretive frameworkof Progressivism, I show how public libraries fit into the broad context of educational reform,civic activism, and government expansion that characterized Progressivism from the 1890s to theGreat Depression. The force of new progressive theories about society and government, and thereality of economic hardship that invited the intervention of such theories, finally tipped theSouth away from unyielding suspicion of big government and allowed new institutions, like thepublic library, to emerge. To be sure, conservatism tempered reform in North Carolina and the South. For example, public libraries mostly remained off limits to African-Americans until after World War II, although some independent libraries were started by middle-class black citizens who advocated the principle of self-help. Only three scholars have addressed the emergence of public libraries in North Carolina, and only two have addressed the context of progressive-era reform. State archivist Thornton W. Mitchell prepared a brief 1983 report summarizing library history over two centuries, including early church, college, and state libraries. More recently, Dr. James V. Carmichael, Jr. has assessed the unique opportunities for women in the libraryprofession in North Carolina, as well as the mixed record of Southern librarians in challenging the region’s conservatism and racism in the early twentieth century. Lastly, Dr. Patrick M. Valentine has treated the role of both homegrown and Northern philanthropy in financing North Carolina public libraries from 1900 up to World War II. My own approach is to use tradepublications, newspapers, and secondary works to bring out the deeper connections between thebroad context of Progressivism and the emergence of the specific institution of the public libraryin North Carolina
-
The Development of Public Libraries in Progressive-Era North Carolina, 1896–1929
2020Co-Authors: Manzo, Robert MichaelAbstract:My research traces the history of one type of educational institution in North Carolina from the beginning to the end of the Southern progressive movement. Progressivism was a national movement that re-interpreted the role of the state in the nation’s economic and social life. Reformers as different as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson espoused a theory of positive government, meaning that government had a responsibility to meet more than just the basic needs of citizens. As a result, the administrative bureaucracy of government at all levels—federal, state, county, and city—grew to unprecedented size during the first quarter of the twentieth century. New agencies, commissions, and boards exercised new or expanded control over such matters as public health, education, interstate trade, and road construction. Although the liberal social-justice ideals of Progressivism were somewhat restrained in the traditionally conservative Southern states, they still had a transformative impact. With efficiency and expertise as the guiding keywords of the era, a proliferation of government and voluntary organizations developed detailed strategic plans to address a range of social and economic problems. Public libraries were one such organization. They were supported by civic clubs, operated under the auspices of government, dedicated to serving citizens’ educational needs, and managed by experts in the novel discipline of library science. Using the interpretive framework of Progressivism, I show how public libraries fit into the broad context of educational reform, civic activism, and government expansion that characterized Progressivism from the 1890s to the Great Depression. The force of new progressive theories about society and government, and the reality of economic hardship that invited the intervention of such theories, finally tipped the South away from unyielding suspicion of big government and allowed new institutions, like the public library, to emerge. To be sure, conservatism tempered reform in North Carolina and the South. For example, public libraries mostly remained off limits to African-Americans until after World War II, although some independent libraries were started by middle-class black citizens who advocated the principle of self-help. Only three scholars have addressed the emergence of public libraries in North Carolina, and only two have addressed the context of progressive-era reform. State archivist Thornton W. Mitchell prepared a brief 1983 report summarizing library history over two centuries, including early church, college, and state libraries. More recently, Dr. James V. Carmichael, Jr. has assessed the unique opportunities for women in the library profession in North Carolina, as well as the mixed record of Southern librarians in challenging the region’s conservatism and racism in the early twentieth century. Lastly, Dr. Patrick M. Valentine has treated the role of both homegrown and Northern philanthropy in financing North Carolina public libraries from 1900 up to World War II. My own approach is to use trade publications, newspapers, and secondary works to bring out the deeper connections between the broad context of Progressivism and the emergence of the specific institution of the public library in North Carolina
Marianne Johnson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Progressivism and academic public finance 1880 to 1930
2014Co-Authors: Marianne JohnsonAbstract:This article examines the institutionalization of public finance as a subfield of economics in American universities from the founding of professional academic economics departments in the 1880s through the eve of the Great Depression. It is argued that what became identified as the accepted domain of public finance was fundamentally shaped by the Progressivism of leading practitioners, in particular Richard T. Ely, H. C. Adams, and E. R. A. Seligman. Considered is the development of a community of scholars recognized as specialists in public finance and the professionalization of public finance as a distinct field within economics. This includes examination of the subject’s definition, its boundaries, and the types of analyses undertaken. Academic training, including courses and readings, at Columbia, Chicago, Harvard, and Wisconsin is compared.
