Rational Choice Theory (RCT) and Its Critics PS7740: Political Economy

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Session 2 Managing the global commons: The logic of international cooperation and the problem of the free-rider.
Advertisements

Public Goods Goods that are normally provided by Governments Goods that are not provided by the private market or are insufficiently provided by the private.
The Well-being of Nations
Nash Implementation of Lindahl Equilibria Sébastien Rouillon Journées LAGV, 2007.
 Interest group  An organization of people with shared policy goals entering the policy process at several points to try to achieve those goals  Interest.
Liberalism Central Assumptions and Propositions View of history: progressive change possible – Material: prosperity through technological progress, economic.
Alex Tabarrok.  If people share a common goal should/will they cooperate to achieve that goal?  Olson – common goals are often public goods, nonexcludable.
1 제목 서강대학교 교수학습센터 부소장 정유성 Rational Choice theory Nov. 04, 2013 Prof. Dr. Kyu Young LEE.
1 Microeconomics Lecture 1 Institute of Economic Theories - University of Miskolc Mónika Kis-Orloczki Assistant lecturer
Fundamentals of Political Science Dr. Sujian Guo Professor of Political Science San Francisco State Unversity
© 2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing The Economic Way of Thinking, 11/e Heyne/Boettke/Prychitko “The Economic Way of Thinking” 11 th Edition Chapter.
International Political Economy
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Agrarian Institutions Analysis Session 13 Dr. Michael Sykuta University of Missouri-Columbia Department of Agricultural Economics Director, Contracting.
STATES AS THE PROBLEM The Predatory State 1. Power to Protect Property = Power to Take Property 2. Fiscal Illusion (citizen’s limited information) Accountability/Responsiveness.
Chapter 16 Public Goods and Public Choice © 2009 South-Western/ Cengage Learning.
POLS 373 Foundations of Comparative Politics Lecture: Why are Poor Countries Poor Lecture: Why are Poor Countries Poor? Rational Choice Perspective.
On Behavioral-Environmental Economics Shogren, J. F. and L. O. Taylor (2008).
Policy Issues of EDRC Models Ex-ante Poverty Impact Assessment of Macroeconomic Policies International Workshop Washington, D.C. October 14-15, 2003 Aghasi.
TOPICS 1. FINANCIAL DECISIONS, INVESTMENT DECISIONS AND DIVIDEND DECISIONS 2. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT PROCESS 3.PROFIT MAXIMIZATION AND WEALTH MAXIMIZATION.
Homework – Day 1 Read all of Chapter 1. As you read, answer the following questions. 1. Define economics. 2. Explain the “economic way of thinking,” including.
The American Free Enterprise System
Objective- and Strategic Analysis
CIFREM Doctoral Program in Economics and Management University of Trento, Italy Thesis Proposal Development (July 2006) Francesca Bortolami
Lecture 3 Tuesday, September 9 THE MARKET: HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK.
Ch.31 Public Choice Theory and the Economics of Taxation
Introduction to Economics
What Makes an Interest Group Successful?. The Surprising Ineffectiveness of Large Groups – Potential group: all the people who might be interest group.
PUBLIC SECTOR ECONOMICS: The Role of Government in the American Economy Randall Holcombe 15 CHAPTER Taxes On Business Income and Wealth.
Economics as Social Science Economic Methodology Lecture 2 Dominika Milczarek-Andrzejewska.
Rational choice 23/ th reading group seminar on qualitative methods.
Homework – Day 1 Read p in Chapter 1. As you read, answer the following questions. 1. Define economics. 2. Identify and explain the three elements.
The Role of Interest Groups, Theories of Interest Group Politics, Qualities of Successful Interest Groups.
© SOUTH-WESTERN  12.1 Students understand common terms & concepts and economics reasoning. Standard Address Objectives  Identify the three questions.
1 1 MICRO ECONOMICS Chapter 1 Introduction to Economics.
Lecture 2 Economic Actors and Organizations: Motivation and Behavior.
Sociology 125 Lecture 20 DEMOCRACY: HOW IT WORKS November 15, 2012.
American Government and Organization PS1301 Friday, 12 September.
The Logic of Politics. Let’s assume people are: 1. self interested 2. rational.
VIII Lecture Time Preferences. Wrap up of the previous lecture Problem of distinguishing between biasing and shaping effect. Evidence for shaping effect.
LECTURER: JACK WU The Theory of Property Tax. Outline Topic I: What Are Property Taxes? Topic II: Property Tax Incidence Topic III: Property Tax Capitalization.
The Nature and Method of Economics 1 C H A P T E R.
Economics for Leaders Rational Decisions Occur at the Margin All or nothing decisions are extremely rare. Most decisions are best made by by weighing the.
Chapter 10: Arguments for and against Protection.
Voter Turnout. Overview Recap the “Paradox” of Voting Incentives and Voter Turnout Voter Mobilization.
Lecture 3 Tuesday, September 11 THE MARKET: HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK.
Interest Groups Vocabulary Mr. Vasquez AP U.S. Government and Politics.
Markets, Maximizers and Efficiency
Liberalism & “Radical” Theories John Lee Department of Political Science Florida State University.
IB Business & Management Topic 6 – Strategy HL ONLY.
Institutional Analysis Lecture 6: Collective Action.
Sociology 125 Lecture 20 DEMOCRACY: HOW IT WORKS November 13, 2014.
II. SOURCES OF MARKET FAILURE. E. Merit goods & the unacceptability of Individual Preferences 1. Religious and humanist impulses 2. Aesthetic, artistic.
Sociology 125 Lectures 19 & 20 DEMOCRACY: HOW IT WORKS November 11 & 16, 2010.
PUBLIC SECTOR ECONOMICS: The Role of Government in the American Economy Randall Holcombe CHAPTER 24 The Federal System of Government.
Advanced Political Economics Fall 2013 Riccardo Puglisi Lobbying.
Political Science 200A Week 5 Micro-Behaviors: Actor Level of Analysis
HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK
Introduction to Economics
Session 2 Managing the global commons:
Bell-Work 3/7/2017 What is the difference between a direct democracy and an indirect democracy (representative)?
Public Finance, 10th Edition
PO 326 Introduction to Political Science
Consumer Choice: Maximizing Utility
The Group Formation Problem
Consumer Choice: Maximizing Utility
EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING IENG314 OPERATIONS RESEARCH II SAMIR SAMEER ABUYOUSSEF
The Three Basic Economic Questions that all Nations Must Answer
Socialism vs. Capitalism
Presentation transcript:

Rational Choice Theory (RCT) and Its Critics PS7740: Political Economy Susumu Suzuki Department of Political Science Wayne State University

Part I: Logic of Collective Action and RCT

Mancur Olson (1932-1998) Former professor of Economics and the founder of IRIS (Institutional Research and the Informal Sector) at the University of Maryland. A Father of Political Economy and Pubic Choice Public Financing and Public Policy Political Economy International Relations e.g., Economic Theory of Alliances Three Major Publications: The Logic of Collective Action (1965) The Rise and Decline of nations (1982) Power and Prosperity (2000) (Source: ttp://www.iris.umd.edu/StaticReader.aspx/About_IRIS/History/Mancur_Olson.htm)

Olson’s Collective Action Approach (1) Olson’s Two Key Questions to Traditional Theory of Rational Group Behavior: Purpose of the organization= Increase in Common Interests What makes collective action possible? what is the relationship between group size and the group? Olson’s Answer: rational and self-interested individuals will not act voluntarily to achieve their common or group interests.

Olson’s Collective Action Approach (2) Why? --Logic of Collective Action“The larger the group, the less it will further its common interests” (p. 36)Free Rider Problem ”The amounts of the collective good that a member of the group receives free from other members will further reduce his incentive to provide more of that good at his own expense” (p. 35) Olson’s argument of Free Rider Problem become a central concern in public policy, political science or economic theory of politicspolitical economy

What is Collective Good? “A common, collective, or public good is here defined as any good such that, if any person X I in a group X1, …..Xn consumes it, it cannot feasibly be withheld from the others in that group” (p. 14) Two Elements of collective or public good Excludability in ownership Rivalrous Consumption

Collective vs. None Collective Good Excludability Yes No Yes No Rivalrous consumption

Olson’s Two Main Theses Olson’s Main Thesis #1: “The larger the group, the farther it will fall short of providing an optimal amount of a collective good” (p.35) due to the free rider problem. Olson’s Main Thesis #2: “In small groups with common interests there is accordingly a surprising tendency for the “exploitation” of the great by the small” (p.35)

Group Size and Behaviors (1) Large Groups: each member gets proportionally smaller benefit from a collective good. the individual does less contribute because of a smaller return. One member of a large group is less likely to behave for all unless the individual return is more than its cost of action. Needs for coercion or some enforcers to provide a collective good. Small Groups: each member gets proportionally more benefit from a collective goods than one of the larger groups. The collective good provides by the voluntary, rational, and unilateral action of one or two members who find that their reward for providing the good is easily more than the costs they pay. Since others pay the costs, some members of small groups see no incentive to provide the good end of the exploitation by the small.

Group Size and Behaviors (2) Two Non-market groups Privileged group: A few of the members with incentive to provide the collective goods for all. No formal organization is necessary (p.50) Intermediate group: with group coordination or institutions, some members of the group provide a collective goods. Latent group: no members of the group have incentive to contribute or act collectively to obtain a collective good. Separate and selective incentive for selective individuals from the group. Positive and negative inventive: Latent group = large group: a latent power or capacity for action, but potential power can be mobilized “only with the aid of selective incentives.”

Economic and Social Incentives Small Groups= privileged and intermediate groups economic and social incentives lead their members to obtain a collective goods Large and latent groups no incentive and no social pressure lead their members to obtain a collective good Demands for institutions

Part II: Critics to RCT

Donald P. Green A. Whitney Griswold Professor of Political Science since 2001 and Director of Institution for Social and Policy Studies since 1996 at Yale University Research Interests: Experimental Research, Party, Voting Behavior etc. Three Books: Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science. (with Ian Shapiro,1994) Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters (with Bradley Palmquist and Eric Schickler, 2002) Get Out The Vote! How to Increase Voter Turnout (with Alan S. Gerber, 2004) (Source: http://research.yale.edu/vote/resume.htm)

Ian Shapiro Sterling Professor of Political Science and Henry R. Luce Director of the MacMillan Center for International and Area Studies at Yale University. Research Interests: Political Behavior, party Thee Major Books Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science (with Donald Green, 1994) Death By A Thousand Cuts:The Fight Over Taxing Inherited Wealth (with Michael Graet, 2004) Containment: Rebuilding a Strategy against Global Terror (2006) (Source: http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/shapiro/flash.htm)

The Nature of RCT Core assumptions: Utility maximization Structure of preferences (Transitivity) If A likes B, B likes C, thus A likes C. Expected utility rather than actual utility Centrality of individuals in the explanation of collective outcomes Homogeneity across the units or individuals

Assumptions in Explanation Intentions as Causes Universalism and the Search for Equilibria

Methodological Pathologies Two Shortcomings of rational choice theories Problem 1. methodological defects Problem 2. Universalist aspiration Problem 2 >> Problem 1 Why? a “method-driven” research rather than a “problem-driven” research.

Shortcomings in RCTs Post Hoc Theory Development Formulating Tests Difficulty with Empirical Test (p. 36) Formulating Tests Slippery Predictions (p. 39) Vaguely Operationalized Predictions (p.41) Selecting and Interpreting Evidence Searching for confirming evidence (p.42) Projecting evidence from Theory (p. 43) Arbitrary Domain Restriction (p. 45)