Nobelpreis für NeuerPlan
So ähnlich fühlt es sich an, mal wieder über Mankiws Blog auf einen interessanten Artikel zur Ökonomie zu stoßen — Michel Spence, selbst Nobelpreisträger und Ökonom, fasst im Forbes Magazin die Arbeiten und Erkenntnisse der diesjährigen Nobelpreisträger, Elinor Ostrom und Oliver Williamson, zusammen.
Im Kern klingt das nach einem unbefangenen Blick auf das, was Märkte können, und was sie nicht können. Und beschäftigt sich anschließend ausführlich mit der Frage, welche Alternativen wir haben, und wo die sich bewähren. Viele Fragen, mit denen ich mich schon beschäftigt habe, werden angesprochen:
The common theme underlying the prize this year is that markets do not solve all problems of resource allocation and incentives well or even at all. That is not a new idea. What is important is that people and societies find ways through organizational structures and arrangements, political and other institutions, values, incentives and recognition, and the careful management of information, to solve these problems. Professors Ostrom and Williamson have led the development of this increasingly important part of economics. In reading their work, you are impressed that economics is not really fundamentally about markets, but about resource allocation and distribution problems. Markets appear because they operate effectively to handle a subset of these resource allocation challenges. Alternative creative institutional arrangements have been devised and refined over time to deal with those that markets handle imperfectly.
Zum Beispiel das Problem der Information als Ware:
But many would argue that the most challenging problems are those associated with knowledge and information. Here Professor Ostrom and Williamson have had a major impact on our understanding.
Related Stories
Nobel Pioneers
A Welcome Nobel
Governing The Commons
Elinor Ostrom And The Digital Commons
Why Elinor Ostrom Matters
Stories
Videos
Rate This Story
Your Rating
Overall Rating
Reader Comments
Bad Fed loose money policy + socialist housing policy by Fannie, Freddie, and HUD + greed by institutions and tens of millions of individuals worldwide = Big financial mess Where’s my prize?Read All Comments (5)
Post a Comment
Knowledge is, for the most part, the shared (read commons) intangible asset on which growth, development and prosperity is based. Though there are proprietary market add-ons designed to create or enhance incentives for innovation, the broad corpus is augmented, shared and transmitted through an extraordinarily complex and evolving set of institutional arrangements that include educational institutions, firms, multinational organizations, and governments. It has long been known that knowledge is an „unusual“ economic commodity, in that if you have it and you give or transmit it or even sell it to me, then we both have it. The costs of creating the knowledge are a lot higher than the costs of sharing it. If it is priced efficiently to cause the sharing to occur, the incentives to produce it may be damaged, and vice versa.
Lesenswerter Artikel, wobei ich noch lieber tiefer in die Originalliteratur schauen würde. Wir brauchen einen Lesekreis!