Knowt
Note
Studied by 24 peopleNoteStudied by 17 peopleNoteStudied by 112 peopleNoteStudied by 30 peopleNoteStudied by 19 peopleNoteStudied by 28 people
Unit 4
Content notes
Dynamic political theories
Pluralism and public choice theories
Structure of institutions from a theoretical perspective
Theoretical models of public policy
Pluralism and public choice theories
Interest groups
Structuralist theories that look at public policy outcomes through the nature or structure of politics, the bureaucracy and society
Dynamic theories which stipulates that public policy can be influenced by environmental and competitive factors
Tend to evaluate tje policy making process on a more competitive scale
Those that have more influence in a competitive environment such as advocacy and interest groups tend to be categorized as pluralistic
Public choice theory views public policy-making from a more macroeconomic perspective, emphasizing the role of the individual above all else
Pluralism
Emphasizes the role of groups, organizations, and unions in the political process
public policy and decision-making cannot be completed as a whole or by individual input, but rather the collection of different inputs from smaller groups
Choice. One of the main characteristics of pluralism is the abundance of choices. In many liberal democracies such as Canada, interest groups and organizations tend to thrive and succeed in pluralist systems. This is because the system allows these organizations to pursue different interests at the same time.
Formality. Groups that fall under the pluralist category usually operate informally and have a permanent involvement in policy-making.
Collectivism. Pluralist groups tend to exert strong collective sentiments which then enables them to exert a strong influence over government.
Role of state. Unlike groups that fall under the more corporatist model, pluralism depends on the role of civil society more so than the state. In these cases, civil society usually tends to dominate its involvement in policy-making procedures. States tend to pursue their own interests in addition to groups and organizations and eventually become the forum for public policy (Miljan, 2017).
Competition. The emphasis on pluralism is always competition or the ability for organizations to compete within a society. Liberal democracies allow for the lenient creations of interest groups and social movements and usually compete with minimum state intervention.
Interest Groups. Interest groups have had a long history of influencing policy and programs in Canada. The article “Opinion: Canada’s fossil fuel lobby influences policy and decisions for major federal government projects” is an example of how major decisions in the fossil fuel industry were significantly influenced by a few lobbyist groups in that sector.
Public choice theory
takes a more economical approach to understanding public policy and decision-making procedures, specifically a more microeconomic theoretical approach
The focus of this theory is more on the individual and the decisions these individuals make, whether it is for self-interested or altruistic reasons
these individuals can range from voters to politicians
The decisions they make and the influences they have over public policy can be a significant reason why a specific public policy is created or changed over time
this type of model, the role of state and non-state actors are considered to be very significant, especially when it concerns their daily interaction and behaviour
Public choice theory video notes: behavioural economics ep.5 what you need to know about public choice – learn liberty
Economics provides insights into human behavior when unlimited desires clash with limited resources.
These insights help predict responses to changes like rising gas prices, subsidized college loans, or vaping regulations.
Public choice economics applies principles of human behavior to the public sector, analyzing actions of politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and voters.
Humans in the public sector behave similarly to those in the private sector, allowing predictions based on economic principles.
Voters often have less incentive to engage in the voting process when personal benefits are small, and costs are high.
This can result in the passage of policies that harm society.
Example Scenario:
A proposed law taxes 90 people $10 each, burns half the revenue, and gives the remaining $450 to 10 people.
Without costs, the law is rejected by a vote of 90 to 10.
Introducing a $15 voting cost changes the outcome:
The 10 beneficiaries, gaining $45 each, are incentivized to pay the $15 cost and vote for the law.
The 90 payers, losing only $10 each, find the $15 voting cost too high and abstain.
Result: The law passes 10 to 0, making society worse off.
This demonstrates the Principle of Concentrated Benefits and Dispersed Costs:
Small groups with concentrated benefits have strong incentives to act.
Larger groups bearing dispersed costs have weaker incentives to oppose.
If voting costs outweigh individual losses, the majority may not participate, enabling harmful policies to pass.
Public choice economics reveals how concentrated benefits and dispersed costs can lead to societal inefficiencies.
Like private sector economics, public choice helps predict and understand behaviors in the public sector.
A deeper understanding of human behavior aids in determining the appropriate role of government in society.
Chapter 3 notes (pg. 83 onward)
The Pluralist Model: Group competition and political marketplace
Pluralism is a key theoretical model of public policy that emphasizes the role of interest groups in influencing government decisions.
It is based on the idea that individuals with shared goals form groups to achieve their objectives more effectively.
Pluralism views competition among groups as open and dynamic, with no structural barriers to participation.
This contrasts with policy feedback theory, which questions the openness of such competition.
The pluralist model was influential in North American political science throughout the 20th century.
It sees state action as the result of competition among organized groups protecting or promoting their members' interests.
While versions of the model vary, pluralism is distinct from Marxist theories of public policy:
Marxists focus on class struggle as the primary source of political conflict.
Pluralists recognize class as one factor but also emphasize other divisions (e.g., ethnicity, language, religion, gender, region, ideology).
These divisions are viewed as independent determinants of political phenomena, not merely extensions of class conflict.
The pluralist model acknowledges policymaking as a competition among elites in democratic societies.
Joseph Schumpeter reconciled elitist decision-making with democratic principles:
He likened competition for political office to an economic market where voters choose policies offered by competing parties.
Schumpeter's ideas influenced Robert Dahl, who defined democracy as polyarchy, or rule by multiple minorities.
According to Dahl, elite rule is moderated by a shared social consensus on democratic values, which checks undemocratic behavior.
Classic pluralist theories of policy-making suggest the state is democratic, even if controlled by elites, as governments must remain minimally responsive to popular demands to avoid replacement by competing elites.
Policy analysis focuses on individuals and organized groups, with political conflict involving shifting alliances that vary by issue.
Ideas and perceptions of individuals, especially elites, play a major role in shaping policy outcomes, explaining trends like the welfare state and cross-national policy differences.
Classic pluralism views public policy as dynamic, not structural.
Criticisms of pluralism:
Certain groups (e.g., businesses) possess greater resources and influence, leading to unequal competition.
Marginalized groups, such as the poor or less educated, often lack the organization needed to participate effectively in the policy process.
Despite claims of openness, competition is more structural and less dynamic in practice.
Business dominance in the policy process:
Robert Heilbroner: Non-business interests must adapt to the prevailing business order due to dominant ideology.
Charles Lindblom: Businesses hold a "privileged position" due to superior financial resources, lobbying access, and ideological dominance reinforced through political and commercial advertising.
Theodore Lowi: Political power favors the established and organized, with businesses occupying a privileged position due to shared interests in stability with the state.
Lindblom’s “The Market as Prison” explanation:
Policy-making in capitalist societies is constrained by the market economy, which operates on inducements, not directives.
Businesses automatically react to policies perceived as harmful by cutting production, investment, or relocating, leading to economic slowdowns and unemployment.
These reactions punish governments, forcing them to remain sensitive to business interests.
Structural and ideological factors "imprison" policy-makers, as interfering with or eliminating the market system is considered unthinkable.
Lindbloms approach aligns with pluralism but leans toward a structural view:
Unlike Marxist theories, Lindblom does not frame society in terms of class struggle.
He treats business as a societal interest, though the most powerful one, within the pluralist framework.
His conclusions resemble Marxist critiques but remain grounded in pluralist ideology.
William D. Coleman and Grace Skogstad developed the "structural-pluralist" framework.
Certain groups maintain privileged, long-term access to policy-making, forming policy communities.
Policy communities dominate specific policy areas, excluding new participants and advancing their own agendas.
Relationships between groups and policy-makers within these communities are termed policy networks, highlighting their closed and influential nature.
Policy networks can be formal or loosely structured, influencing policy success or failure.
Example: In the labour law policy community, politicians, bureaucrats, businesses, and labour are central, while peripheral groups (e.g., women seeking maternity leave provisions) have less influence.
The "policy community" model reflects the structural, less dynamic side of pluralist theory.
Key assumptions in policy network analysis:
Modern governance is non-hierarchical, requiring collaboration between public and private actors.
Relationships within networks must be disentangled to understand governance.
While networks influence policy, governments remain ultimately responsible for governance.
The Public Choice Model: homo economicus and homo politicus
James Buchanan, awarded the 1986 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, is a key founder of public choice theory, also known as political economy or the economic theory of politics.
Public choice theory applies microeconomic principles (rational choice) to political and policy decisions.
It assumes homo politicus (political man) behaves like homo economicus (economic man), seeking to maximize self-interest with available information.
Shares similarities with pluralist theory, focusing on competition between groups but emphasizes methodological individualism (individual as the basic unit of analysis).
Politicians, bureaucrats, and interest group leaders are viewed as political entrepreneurs, acting on rational self-interest:
Politicians aim for election and retention of power.
Bureaucrats seek promotions, larger budgets, and expanded roles.
Policy outcomes arise from strategic behavior and overlapping "games" connecting the state and society.
Divisions and competition:
Bureaucracy consists of "spender" and "saver" organizations with differing incentives.
Politicians compete due to varying constituencies and interests tied to bureaucratic oversight.
Decision-making influenced by:
Special interest groups, media, and electorate behavior (actual and anticipated).
Politics involves multi-level bargaining, where power is tied to control of resources enabling profitable exchanges.
Power is a transactional property pervading the political marketplace, expressed in a number of ways:
the votes of electors;
the perceived capacity of the media to influence the views held by voters on particular issues and in relation to particular political parties or interests;
the ability of special interest groups to mobilize supporters and allies for collective action, and to offer inducements or deploy what politicians believe to be credible threats;
the control that bureaucrats exercise over the flow of vital information and the delivery of programs; and
the capacity of governments to manage the public agenda and to confer benefits on voters or special interest groups whose support is up for grabs and to impose costs on those whose support is lost anyway. Where there is no avoiding the imposition of costs on possible supporters, this will be done in ways that soften or hide their impact.
The public choice model incorporates rules (Constitution and laws) to constrain individual behavior, preventing chaotic competition in policy formation.
Constitutional rules are central, as they shape incentives and constraints influencing individual decision-making.
Inefficient policy outcomes may arise when constitutional constraints limit a government's ability to adopt cost-effective solutions.
Game theory is a key element of the public choice framework:
Politics is modeled as competitive gaming with players, rules, strategies, payoffs, and solutions.
Outcomes depend on the interplay of choices made by all players, reflecting competition, strategy, bargaining, and negotiation.
Public choice’s strengths include its scientific, logical rigor and use of mathematical and quantitative methods.
Critics question whether public choice is purely positive (descriptive) or has normative (value-based) dimensions.
Normative aspects of public choice:
Focus on institutional and constitutional arrangements that maximize individual choice and minimize interference.
Emphasis on economic efficiency (achieving outcomes at the least cost).
Importance of institutional fairness, where arrangements are perceived as fair by individuals.
The framework is grounded in liberal philosophy, prioritizing individual rights, freedoms, and fairness while balancing efficiency and equity.
Early public choice theory faced formal criticisms, particularly of the "invisible hand" theorem, which assumes competitive markets lead to Pareto optimality (maximized individual utility).
Critics questioned whether Pareto optimality applies to public policy, particularly in liberal-democratic politics in capitalist states.
Kenneth Arrow’s “impossibility theorem”:
No democratic institution can achieve Pareto optimal outcomes because choices cancel out in large groups with multiple alternatives.
All decisions are effectively "dictatorial," as small minorities often prevail over majority preferences.
Example: First-past-the-post electoral systems where minority popular votes can result in majority parliamentary control.
Arrow presents a pessimistic view of democracy, suggesting it fails to achieve true majority rule.
Mancur Olson's critique:
Rational individuals wouldn’t participate in interest group activity if costs (time, effort, money) outweigh benefits.
People can free-ride, obtaining policy outcomes without participation, making participation irrational.
Olson argued politically active individuals are motivated by altruistic or idealistic goals, not rational self-interest.
Criticism of voting behavior models:
Donald Green and Ian Shapiro (1994) observed that most people vote, despite rational-choice predictions suggesting they wouldn’t.
This challenged the applicability of rational-actor models in politics.
Recent modifications to public choice theory:
Include altruistic utility preferences to account for political participation and voting as rational within a broader framework.
Ongoing revisions address earlier criticisms, enriching contemporary public policy studies.
Multiple streams
John Kingdon's multiple streams framework explains why some issues get on the agenda while others are ignored.
Key features include ambiguity, time constraints, policy preferences, unclear technology, fluid participation, and stream independence.
Unlike the stages model, this theory assumes competing solutions exist and focuses on how policies reach the agendaand change occurs.
Problem definition is crucial; framing a problem clearly for public, media, and politicians increases agenda-setting success.
Time constraints limit government action, especially in short election cycles or minority parliaments.
Policy-makers face limited time, limited information, and must make decisions based on pre-existing ideologies and the conceptual framing of issues.
COVID-19 policy example:
Canada initially avoided banning travel from China, labeling such action as racist, following health advice.
Australia banned travel from China, reducing COVID-19 deaths significantly.
Canada eventually adopted stricter measures, but the delay highlighted policy uncertainty and competing priorities.
Unclear technology
Describes limited understanding of roles and processes within organizations.
Politicians often rely on trial and error due to their lack of understanding of bureaucratic operations.
Fluid participation
Frequent changes in political and bureaucratic roles create challenges but can also prevent stagnation.
Requires strong training and discussions to align individuals with the overall mission.
Five streams in the framework:
Problem stream: Identifying issues.
Policy stream: Developing solutions.
Political stream: Political will and dynamics.
Policy window: Opportunities for action.
Policy entrepreneur: Advocates pushing for alignment.
These streams operate independently but must converge for policy adoption.
Problem stream:
Policy-making requires clear problem definition to gain attention and lead to desired solutions.
Problems and solutions are often linked but must be articulated effectively to drive action.
Policy problems emerge from different perspectives on how things should be and where government intervention is needed.
Example: Wealth inequality
Pro-wealth tax: Advocates argue it reduces income disparity and funds public initiatives.
Anti-wealth tax: Critics claim it discourages investment, reduces jobs, and leads to tax avoidance.
Policy entrepreneurs are crucial for advancing these debates onto the political agenda.
Example: COVID-19 pandemic
Highlighted health and economic policy challenges.
Advocates like the Broadbent Institute framed a wealth tax as essential for funding an inclusive recovery plan, citing strong public support.
Getting issues on the agenda involves:
Indicators: Trends like unemployment, budgets, and crime rates.
Focusing events: Sudden, attention-grabbing occurrences.
Feedback: Evaluating whether current policies meet goals and require adjustments.
Policy stream
The policy stream involves generating policy alternatives within policy communities.
Policy communities consist of civil servants, interest groups, academics, researchers, and others working on solutions to policy problems.
Ideas in this stream are part of the "policy primeval soup," where debate and discussion refine and strengthen proposals.
Only policy ideas with viable alternatives gain serious consideration.
Policy communities vary in structure, member linkages, and integration within larger communities.
Success depends on strategic planning, leadership, risk-taking, compromise, and media use.
Strategies differ by political alignment:
Left-leaning groups: Use protests to gain media attention and public support for issues like climate, gender, or race relations.
Right-leaning groups: Focus on formal lobbying and publishing in media to influence politicians and public opinion.
Political stream
The political stream includes three key elements: the national mood, interest groups, and government.
National mood: Represents public sentiment on issues, shifting over time. Governments gauge it through public opinion polls, media reports, and focus groups.
Public opinion often shifts between economics, health, and environment, influencing policy focus.
Interest group campaigns: These include lobbying and protests to gain media attention and public support. The goal is to influence policy-makers.
Example: Greta Thunberg’s 2019 climate change protests grew into a global movement, influencing government responses.
Government: Policy change requires alignment between public mood, interest groups, and government.
Politicians risk backlash if they misjudge national sentiment or align too closely with one interest group. Example: Trudeau’s support for both climate protests and pipeline policy led to tensions with environmentalists.
Policy window
Changing policy direction is difficult and often happens in short, specific periods.
Routine moments for policy change include elections when new governments take office.
Unexpected events, like national emergencies or disasters, can also open policy windows.
Problem stream: A policy window opens when there’s a shift in national mood or a focused event draws public attention to an issue.
Political stream: A new government or political party forming can open a policy window.
Courts striking down legislation can also open a policy window, as seen with the Carter decision.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on physician-assisted dying in Canada created a policy window, requiring Parliament to act within a year to create new legislation.
Policy entrepreneurs
Policy entrepreneurs are key actors who advocate for a policy by investing time, resources, energy, reputation, and money.
They aim for future gains, such as material or influential benefits.
A policy entrepreneur can be anyone in the policy process, including bureaucrats, journalists, academics, MPs, or interest group activists.
Their goal is to push a policy proposal through the policy stream, making it a viable alternative.
Effective policy entrepreneurs frame the problem in a way that attracts attention and builds consensus.
They time their efforts to align with national mood shifts or focusing events (policy windows).
Networks and political alignments play a crucial role in the success of policy entrepreneurs.
Punctuated equilibrium theory
Punctuated equilibrium theory explains why policy systems are stable until sudden, dramatic changes occur.
The theory is rooted in agenda-setting and focuses on why some groups are disadvantaged in policy-making.
Three general themes of punctuated equilibrium:
Policy-making alternates between stability and sudden leaps.
U.S. political institutions exacerbate this pattern.
Policy images play a key role in expanding issues beyond policy monopolies.
Policy images are used to frame issues for the public, conveying emotional significance beyond just facts and statistics.
Positive feedback leads to profound change, like the cannabis reform during Trudeau's first term, when favorable conditions aligned.
Negative feedback explains inaction or stability, seen in government budgeting trends, such as post-WWII austerity and the pandemic-driven spending shift.
Interest groups and policy entrepreneurs engage in "venue shopping" to find the best place to push their agenda, sometimes turning to courts or international pressure for change.
The perspectives compared
Different theoretical perspectives on policy offer distinct views on political conflict, policy processes, and state actions.
These perspectives are not mutually exclusive but emphasize different aspects of policy formation.
Each theory has strengths in its focus area, and combining them can provide a more complete understanding of policy.
Structuralist theories, like Marxism, focus on class distinctions and the economy's influence on the state.
Dynamic theories, such as pluralism, emphasize group interests and individual motivations in politics.
Public choice theory highlights individual decision-making and economic efficiencies, rejecting abstract concepts like classes and groups.
The advocacy coalition approach focuses on coalitions of beliefs, while systems theory and institutionalism examine political systems and state configurations.
The multiple streams approach sees policy change as resulting from the coupling of three streams (problems, policies, and politics) during opportunities.
Punctuated equilibrium theory looks at factors that lead to major or incremental policy changes.
The validity of these perspectives depends on how well they explain "facts," though different theories may interpret facts differently (e.g.,
class).
Structuralist
Marxist
Societal forces,classes
Class distinctions
Globalization
Systems, multinational organizations
Policy options available to the governments are increasingly limited by large multinational corporations in industries from natural resources and international institutions
Institutionalism
Systems
Policy is determined by the structural configuration of the state itself
Systems
Systems Theory
Individuals or groups within the system
Pluralist analysis with a functionalist orientation
Advocacy Coalition
Coalitions and subsystems
Bounded rational individuals motivated by beliefs
Policy Feedback
System, but implicit
Emphasis on the effect of public policy on the meaning of citizenship, form of governance, power of groups, political agendas—all of which affect future policy
Dynamic
Pluralist
Individuals, organized groups
Competing interest groups influence the outcome of government decisions
Public Choice
Individuals
Positive theory with implicit normative values such as individual choice, economic efficiencies, and institutional fairness
Multiple Streams
System, but focus is on actors coupling streams
Identifies three streams that come together during windows of opportunity to cause major policy change
Punctuated Equilibrium
System, but implicit
Describes factors that lead to major policy change and those that constrain change or produce incremental change
Summary
Different theoretical perspectives struggle to communicate due to disagreements over basic "facts" and interpretations.
A theory is like a story that explains reality, and its plausibility depends on the listener's worldview, making it subjective.
Some theoretical differences are based on personal or social characteristics and cannot be resolved.
For example, interpretations of social mobility or social spending can differ drastically, even with the same data.
One explanation may focus on popular demand and social values, while another might emphasize class conflict and economic structures.
Disagreements on policy formation often stem from differing views on who benefits from state actions.
While some differences may be irreconcilable, agreement on certain facts and empirical evidence allows for useful comparison of theories.
KEY TERMS
accumulation policies Policies that directly support profit-oriented business activity.
actor Anyone who regularly attempts to influence policies.
ambiguity in problem definition Policy problems are often ill defined, which hampers them getting on the political agenda.
bounded rationality The failure to examine all the costs and benefits of a potential decision and choose the best course of action. Decisions are made by limited information and incomplete policy discussion.
culturalism An approach to understanding public policy that focuses on the structural influence of culture.
deep core Beliefs that have foundational normative values that form a person’s central belief system.
dynamic theories Theories of public policy that see the policy process as open to competitive influences.
environmental determinism A theory that sees the public policy process as structured by broad societal factors like culture and gender.
feedback Input on whether existing policies have achieved their goals and warrant new thinking and responses.
feminism An approach to understanding public policy that focuses on the structural influence of gender.
fluid participation Individuals come and go within organizations.
focusing events High-impact situations that are sudden and get on the public’s agenda quickly.
frameworks A broad scope of analysis.
game theory A theory that explains the policy process by analogy to the characteristics of gaming and strategy.
globalization A theory that explains the policy process in terms of the influence of the global advancement of trade, technology, transportation, and liberal ideology.
incrementalism A theory of public policy that explains current policy as the result of minor changes to previous policy decisions and predicts slow, insignificant developments.
indicators Trends and data routinely received, such as unemployment statistics, the state of the budget, crime, and other relevant statistics.
institutionalism A theory of public policy that views policy outcomes as being structured by the design of political institutions.
Instrumental policy belief Beliefs that relate to policy implementation and may change when more information is obtained.
interest group campaigns Activities of the groups to get their issues on the political agenda.
legitimation policies Policies that reduce interclass conflict by providing subordinate classes with benefits that reduce their dissatisfaction with the inequalities generated by the capitalist economy.
Marxist theory A theory that views public policy as a product of class divisions in society.
models Theoretical tools that use analogy and abstract visual imagery to create a linguistic representation of reality.
national mood The overall feeling toward an issue or event of the majority of people.
negative feedback Criticisms of policy are dampened by established norms and processes, which results in little or no change to policy.
normative political theories Theories that make moral judgments about policy outcomes.
parsimonious The least complex explanation for an observation.
pluralist model A theory of public policy that sees the policy process as an open competition among organized interest groups.
policy community Long-term participant groups with specific policy interests and agendas that are able to prevent new participants from influencing the policy area.
policy core Basic value propositions and values for policies.
policy entrepreneurs. Advocates for a policy position who invest their time, resources, energy, reputation, and even money to promote a policy.
policy images Empirical information combined with emotional appeal.
policy networks Using trusted relationships and associations to help formulate and advocate for policy change.
policy stream The process in which policy alternatives are generated in policy communities.
political stream When policy-makers have the motive and opportunity to turn an issue into policy.
policy window Windows of opportunity for advocates of proposals to push their solution or gain attention for their problems. Advocates can be politicians or interest groups.
positive feedback When small changes cause future changes to be amplified. Protest and criticism are allowed, for example, and they reinforce the change-creating momentum.
positive theories Theories that explain politics as it is rather than as it should be.
political entrepreneurs People who create ideas and innovations and act as leaders in politics.
problematic policy preferences How policy actors think about an issue depending on its label (health, education, politics, morality) and on the information that has been taken into consideration
public choice theory An approach to understanding public policy that uses analogies with economic understandings of human behaviour to explain politics.
punctuated equilibrium theory The idea that policy is usually static but has periodic changes based on emerging issues or focusing events.
State capacity The financial or administrative resources of government.
structuralist theories A category of theories of public policy that holds the policy process and its outcomes to be determined by the broad characteristics of society, such as class, gender, culture, economics, and so on.
systems theory An approach to the study of public policy that views the policy process as a self-perpetuating system that structures its outcomes to maintain itself.
unclear technology Individuals have limited understanding of how their role fits in the overall mission of the organization.
wicked problem A problem that has conflicting goals, disputes on technical matters, and many different groups at different levels of government.
Weck-Hanneman reading notes
Introduction
Globalization is a prominent topic in contemporary discussions.
Notably, the integration of globalization with public choice theory has received little attention.
Literature search results reveal a scarcity of connections between globalization and public choice, indicating a gap in research.
Structure of the Paper
Segment on Globalization Interpretation
Examines whether globalization is a repackaging of previous concepts (like internalization).
Economic Instruments Analysis
Reviews analytical frameworks available in public choice and economic theory.
Analysis of Globalization's Effects
Investigates public perceptions and societal reactions towards globalization.
Discussion on Public Choice Theory's Role
Evaluates whether globalization is a challenge or merely an application area for existing theories.
The Phenomenon of Globalization
Economic Internationalization vs. Globalization
Internationalization: Increase in cross-border transactions and the necessary institutional conditions for their facilitation.
Includes trade in goods, services, technology, and information flow.
Historically focused on goods; recent emphasis on investments and multinational activities.
Globalization: Seen as an advanced form of internationalization leading to higher economic activity across borders.
Characterized by functional integration of internationally dispersed economic activities.
Driven by technological advancements and reduced transaction costs.
Globalization results in the integration of global markets for factors of production.
Consequences of Globalization
Technological Advancements: Particularly in transport and communication.
Environmental Impact: Increase in cross-border environmental issues, including pollution and biodiversity loss.
Growing concerns over economic inequalities and fears regarding job security due to globalization.
Perception of Globalization
Often viewed negatively in popular discourse, associated with rising unemployment and inequality.
Notable works reflect concerns over global competition and its implications for democratic politics.
General agreement that globalization reflects a transition from industrial to information societies.
International Political Economy and Public Choice
Utilizing Public Choice Theory
Public Choice Theory: Provides a framework to understand individual behavior within political and economic contexts.
Different from traditional models focusing on nations or states, it concentrates on individuals (voters, politicians, etc.).
Has applications in various economic discussions, notably:
The political economy of protectionism explains how trade barriers arise from self-interest dynamics in democracies.
Examines international public goods and cross-border externalities requiring collective action.
Evaluates international organizations and decision-making processes using public choice frameworks, including game theory.
Political Dynamics in International Cooperation
Competition among political systems can enhance effective governance and accountability through the “exit” option.
Political mechanisms can lead to an efficient public service delivery by introducing accountability.
The Globalization Debate from a Public Choice Perspective
Globalization: Positive-Sum vs. Zero-Sum Games
Traditional views (e.g., Krugman) emphasize mutual benefits from trade and specialization.
New growth theories argue globalization leads to asymmetric benefits, benefiting industrialized nations disproportionately.
Concerns arise over labor market competition leading to job losses in wealthier countries.
Domestic Policy Implications
Fears related to globalization are driving demands for protective measures and social insurance from governments.
Calls for protectionism arise during economic downturns, increasing support for isolative policies.
Perspectives on Economic and Political Integration
Globalization leads to both integration (in terms of markets) and fragmentation (in terms of political units).
The increasing preference for supranational cooperation leads politicians to centralize decision-making at the EU level.
Conclusion: Globalization as Challenge and Application
Summary of Globalization's Role
Globalization represents both a challenge and an application for public choice theory.
Ongoing research is needed to understand institutional changes and the reactions of political and economic participants to globalization.
Central ongoing inquiries involve sources of global market developments and the efficacy of public choice in forecasting political responses.
Doctor-assisted suicide debate notes
Existing quebec decision
Sonya is shocked
Taking us in the wrong direction
Leaves many things unanswered
Forces other people to assist the suicide
Unclear
Doctors may not have to comply, can pass on the request
Gray areas
Savings to be made by the government allowing handicapped and severely ill to end their lives
Pressure put on to people to take themselves out of the equation
Ageism
Dr. catherine something idk gariatric medicine
Against euthanasia
People don’t always get perfect health care
People may feel coerced into doing it
People can’t make a clear headed decision they want to die
Fears abuse
Depression, blindness, things that have nothing to do with the end of life
Believes euthanasia for animals is a short cut too
Believes things can be treated, make them not want to die anymore
Would prefer better access to care
Believes it may lead to care options becoming even more limited
Text message
Thrilled with the news
Treating animals with better care
Gets to go wrapped in a warm blanket with their owners holding them
Dr. from montreal
Right to die with dignity group
A personal choice, the doctor will never ask the person
Strict criteria
Enduring and intolerable suffering
What about chronic depression?
Quebec law 52
Advice of two doctors giving their consultation and advice
Not the point
Shifting resources?
Doesn’t believe this is true
Not what happened in the netherlands or belgium
Doesn’t believe it's necessarily related
Dangerous to say that a doctor will tell someone to die to save money
Doesn’t believe a doctor will ever do this
The patient must ask repeatedly
Supreme Court Decision on Assisted Dying
Recently, the Supreme Court announced a unanimous decision regarding assisted dying, significantly influencing the country's direction on the matter.
This decision clarifies uncertainties surrounding existing legislation, particularly the laws implemented in Quebec.
Public Reaction and Concerns
Initial Reaction
Sonia, a caller from LaSalle, expressed shock at the decision, feeling it doesn't lead to positive changes.
Concerns raised include:
Heavy emphasis in the ruling on cost responsibilities over substantive legal clarifications.
Feelings of coercion and pressure among vulnerable populations to consider assisted dying.
Personal Perspective
Sonia's experience caring for her parents highlighted potential conflicts within the healthcare system, suggesting economic motivations might pressure vulnerable individuals to opt for assisted dying.
Noted ageism in healthcare attitudes may contribute to a prevalent mindset that encourages elderly individuals to end their lives for the perceived societal good.
Medical Professional Insights
Expert Commentary
Dr. Catherine Ferrier, a geriatric medicine doctor at McGill University, shares skepticism about the ruling's implications.
Highlights include:
Vulnerable patients often feel coerced and may make decisions that do not reflect their true desires due to exterior pressures.
Theoretical versus practical realities of individuals making clear decisions about their end-of-life options.
Risks and International Perspectives
Cites examples from Belgium and the Netherlands where euthanasia laws expanded, resulting in abuses, such as euthanizing individuals based on psychological suffering (depression) rather than terminal conditions.
Discussion about the widening of legal parameters and safeguards once assisted dying laws are established; concern over the inability to revert these laws back.
Ethical and Societal Implications
Concern about Decision Making:
Underlines the ethical dilemma surrounding the capacity of individuals (especially minors) to make such life-ending decisions.
The general sentiment of concern over potential normalization of euthanasia for reasons beyond terminal illness.
Discussion on the care for animals versus care for humans at the end of life.
Quote from a listener expressing happiness about the option for humane euthanasia.
Listener highlights the compassion shown when euthanizing pets, preferring to go that way herself.
Euthanization often occurs due to a perceived lack of utility or suffering in animals.
Arguments raised against euthanasia for humans:
It’s often viewed as the only option to alleviate suffering.
Alternative options exist: treating depression, pain management, and providing comfort.
Palliative Care
Less than 30% of Canadians receive adequate palliative care, especially in rural areas.
Palliative care is often underfunded despite being cost-effective compared to hospital care.
Effective palliative care can result in patients not wanting to end their lives, highlighting its importance.
Concerns Over Euthanasia Ruling
Possible deemphasis on palliative care due to legalized euthanasia.
Palliative care is often overshadowed by high-tech medical interventions.
Anecdotal evidence suggests many dying patients suffer unnecessarily, often due to inadequate care.
Perspectives from Medical Professionals
Dr. Katherine Ferrier (geriatric medicine) advocates for better care over euthanasia.
Emphasizes that people need proper care rather than being euthanized when suffering.
Cites that even in impoverished nations, people are not euthanized due to lack of resources.
Dr. Georges L'Eperance (neurosurgeon) supports euthanasia legislation:
Indicates it provides dignity for terminally ill patients.
Refutes claims that euthanasia leads to exploitation of vulnerable individuals.
Criteria for Euthanasia
Laws require independent evaluations by two doctors before euthanasia can be granted.
Focus remains on individuals with enduring and intolerable suffering.
Concerns about cases of chronic depression and how they fit within these laws.
Palliative Care Growth
Claims from Dr. L'Eperance that the quality and accessibility of palliative care in Quebec has improved over the years.
Emphasis on the misconception that palliative care resources are scarce.
Reassurance that doctors do not pressure patients into euthanasia for resource allocation reasons.
Conclusion
The discussion reflects a deep division in opinions regarding euthanasia and palliative care.
Importance is placed on ensuring both systems can coexist to provide dignified end-of-life options for individuals.
NoteStudied by 24 peopleNoteStudied by 17 peopleNoteStudied by 112 peopleNoteStudied by 30 peopleNoteStudied by 19 peopleNoteStudied by 28 people