外交学论文.docx
- 文档编号:9532895
- 上传时间:2023-02-05
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:14
- 大小:26.67KB
外交学论文.docx
《外交学论文.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《外交学论文.docx(14页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
外交学论文
Theemptyintersection:
whysolittlepublicchoiceinpoliticalscience?
RandyT.Simmons1•RyanM.Yonk1
1Introduction
Publicchoicesitsattheintersectionofeconomicsandpoliticalscience.Itoughttobeeasilyintegratedintointroductorycoursesineachdiscipline,especiallyiftheinstructorisinterestedinpoliticaleconomy.Inthisessayweexaminewhether,andtowhatextent,publicchoiceprinciplesaretaughtinintroductorypoliticalsciencecourses,specificallyintheintroductiontoAmericangovernment.Wefindlittleevidencethatpublicchoicehaspenetratedsyllabiandintroductorytextsandthenspeculateaboutwhythatisthecase.Wealsoexplainhowandwhyweteachpublicchoiceinourowncourses.
WearepoliticalscientistswithstrongrootsinVirginiaPublicChoice.Assuch,weareoutliersinourdisciplinesincemostpoliticalscientistswhoadoptarationalchoiceapproach,ofwhichpublicchoiceisapart,followtheRochesterSchoolofpositivepoliticaltheoryandconfinetheirstudiestomathematicalexplanationsofpoliticalprocesses.WearemorenormativeinourapproachandstickcloselytoJamesBuchanan’sdescriptionopublicchoiceas‘‘politicswithoutromance’’(Buchanan1979).
WeteachourcoursesfromtheBuchananperspective.OnereasonisthatourexperiencetellsusthatBuchanan,Tullock,andotherslaidoutmorethanjustasetofacademicideas.Theyactuallydescribedhowtheworldweknowworks.Simmonsspent10yearsincitygovernmentasamemberofacitycouncilandthenasmayor.HewasananalystintheU.S.DepartmentoftheInteriorfor2years,headofapoliticalsciencedepartmentfor15yearsanddirectsaresearchinstitutewithinastateuniversity.Forseveralyears,Yonkco-hostedadrive-timeradioprogramthatemphasizedanalysesoflocalpoliticalissues.Heinterviewedlocalpublicofficialsrangingfromplanningcommissioners,totheholdersofelectiveoffices,tomanagersoflandfills.Hestudiedlocalgovernmentissues,developingaspecializedexpertiseintheirpolitics.Hedirectedanagencythatdependedonstatefundstoprovidementalhealthservices,gainingafirst-handeducationinbureaucraticpolitics,andlikeSimmonsdirectsauniversity-basedresearchinstitute.Wearewellversedinthepoliticsofbureaucracy.Inaddition,wehaveindependentlyandcooperativelydevelopedstrategiesandtacticswithlocalandstatepoliticalcampaignoperatives.Ourexperienceswithgovernmentmakeusskepticalofpositiveorevenbenignviewsofgovernment.Wehaveexperiencedtheperversitiesofmajorityrule,attemptstoadoptinefficientpoliciesandredistributewealthorrights,andthefailuresofbureaucraticsystems.Wereallydostudypoliticswithouttheromance.
Nearlynoneofourpoliticalsciencecolleaguesteachfromapublicchoiceperspective.Apparentlytheyneverdid,asnotedbyDowandMunger(1990)aswellasMitchell(1999).Bothofthosearticlesconcludedthatpoliticalscientistspublishingscholarlyjournalarticlesandbooksdidnotusetheirresearchinclassroomdiscussions.
Whydopoliticalscientistsnotteachpublicchoiceintheclassroom?
Theeasyandincorrectansweristhatpoliticalscientistsarenottrainedinwaysthatpreparethemtoteachrudimentarypublicchoiceinintroductoryclasses.Thatmayhavebeenthecase20yearsagobutissurelynotthecasenow.Graduateeducationinpoliticalsciencehasgottenmoretechnical,moremathematical,andmoredemanding.Adoctoraldegreeinmostpoliticalsciencedepartmentslooksverymuchlikeadegreeinaneconomicsdepartment.AmoredifficultanswerthatweexploreattheendofthisessayisthatthecultureoftheprofessionatlargeandwithintheIvoryTowermaybeacorecause.Webaseourclaimthatnearlynoneofourcolleaguesteachpublicchoiceinintroductorycoursesinpartonareviewoftheintroductorycoursestaughtatthetop-rankeddepartmentsintheUnitedStates.Wereviewedsyllabi,identifiedthetextbooksused,andthensurveyedthetextbooksforpublicchoicecontent.
InreviewingthesecourseswefoundawidevarietyoftextsandapproachestoteachingIntroductiontoAmericanGovernment.Weidentifiedninetextsusedbymultipleinstitutionsthatformthecoreofourtextbookreview.Wethenexaminedtheindexes,tablesofcontents,andsomesubstantivechapterstolookforPublicChoiceideas.AlistofthetextsweconsideredisprovidedinTable1.
WhyintroductiontoAmericangovernmentcourses?
Afewdepartments,butnotmost,offeracoursethatisanintroductiontopoliticalscienceandsurveysthefield—internationalrelations,comparativepolitics,politicaltheoryorphilosophy,andAmericangovernment.ThecommoncourseacrossalldepartmentsistheIntroductiontoAmericanGovernmentcourse.Formostdepartments,itisthedefaultintroductiontothefieldofpoliticalscience.Andformoststudents(non-majors)whotakeit,itistheironlycourseinpoliticalsciencebecausetheyenrolltofilldistributionorgeneraleducationrequirements.Weassertthatifpublicchoicehasaffectedpoliticalscienceinmeaningfulandsubstantialwaysitshouldbeevidentinthesecoursesandthetextbooksrequiredbytheinstructors.
Weneededtodecidewhatconceptstosearchforandwhethertheyfairlyrepresentedthecoreofpublicchoice.Thatis,wefirsthadtodecideifthereisacoretopublicchoiceand,ifso,whatisinit.Ourfirstinclinationwastogeneratealistoftermsthatshowupinourowncourses.Itdidnottakeuslongtocomposeamassivenumberofpossiblesearchtermsthatwouldhavemadeanalysisunwieldyatbestand,mostlikely,impossible.WechoseinsteadtorelyonCharlesK.Rowley’sessay‘‘PublicChoice:
theoriginsanddevelopmentofaresearchprogram,’’publishedinTheElgarCompaniontoPublicChoice,SecondEdition(Rowley2013,pp.12–38)asanauthoritativesourceofkeypublicchoiceconcepts.Rowleybeginstheessaybyassertingthatpublicchoiceis‘‘locatedattheinterfacebetweeneconomicsandpoliticalscience’’(Rowley2013,p.12).Sofar,sogood—ifpublicchoiceispartoftheintersectionoftheoverlappingsetscomprisedofeconomicsandpoliticalscience,wewouldhopetoseesomepublicchoiceinthemostbasicpoliticalsciencetextbooks.
2Thepublicchoicecanon
Rowleyidentifiessixindividualauthorsandonepairofauthorswhoseworkformthefoundationsofmodernpublicchoice:
Black(1958),Arrow(1950,1951),Downs(1957),Riker(1962,1982),Olson(1965),Niskanen(1971),astheindividualauthorsandBuchananandTullock(1962)asthepairofauthors.UsingRowley’sdiscussionanddescriptionwehighlighttheideasfromeachthatshouldbeofcoreimportancetopoliticalscienceanddiscussthoseideasbrieflybelow.UsingourcompiledlistofthemostoftenusedIntroductiontoAmericanPoliticstextbooksweconsideredwhethereachoftheauthors’coreideashadpenetratedthemostbasicofpoliticalsciencetexts.
2.1Votecycling,theillusionofmajorityrule,andthepublicinterestisanemptyset
BothDuncanBlackandKennethArrowareofparticularimportancetopoliticalscience,becausetheyrediscoveredandbroughtintomodernconsciousnesstheworkoftheFrenchnoblementheComptedeBordaandtheMarquisdeCondorcet.Theyindependentlyappliedmathematicalrigortothequestionofhowmuchconfidencetoplaceinthechoicesofpoliticaldecision-makingbodies.Specifically,theyconsideredtheoutcomesofdifferentdecisionruleswhenthevotingbody(ofthreeormore)isconsideringmorethantwocandidatesorpolicies.Theircoreinsightwastohighlighthow,dependingonthedecisionruleinplace,elections,committeevotes,orothercollectivedecision-makingprocessesmayleadtoindeterminateoutcomesowingtothecyclicalnatureoftheresults.OneexampleofthisishighlightedinUScongressionalvoteswhenabillissupportedbyamajorityaswritten,isamendedbyamajority,andamendedbillsaredefeateddespitethebillandamendmenthavingamajorityofvotesindependently.
Thevotecyclingproblemissometimesreferredtoasthevoteproblem,thejuryproblem,orCondorcet’sparadox.ComptedeBorda(forwhomthesolutionisnamedsuggestedonepossiblebutimperfectsolution,inwhichvotersallocatetwovotestothefirstpreference,onetothesecond,andnonetothethird,inathree-personraceorreferendumtosolvethisproblemofvotecycling.1
BlackrediscoveredCondorcet’sparadoxofcyclicalmajoritiesandprovidedoneanswerthatliesattheheartofmuchpublicchoiceanalysisofvoting—themedianvotertheorem.Accordingtothemedianvotertheorem,theoptimalstrategyforcandidatesvyingforelectionistotakepositionsalongthe(one-dimensional)ideologicalspectrumsoastocapturethevoter(whoisassumedtobevotingsincerely)locatedatthemedianofthedistributionofvoters’preferencesandthusmaximizethechancesofwinning.Fewideasaremoreimportanttomodernstudiesofpoliticalbehaviorandelectoralpoliticsthanthecorelogicofthemedianvoter.
Arrow’sinterestwasindeterminingwhethersocialwelfarefunctionsexistandwhethervoters,whenfacedwithmultiplechoices,selectoutcomesthatwillyieldsociallyoptimaloutcomesthatarebothcompleteandtransitive.Fromthisinsightpoliticalscientistshavedevelopedmultipleelectoraltheoriesthatrecognizevotingcyclesandtheimpossibilityofmajorityruledetermininganunambiguouslybestoutcome.Inourownworkonthissubjectwehaveexploredhowtheseissuesaffectactualelectoraldecisions.Wefind,consistentwithArrow’sinsightthat,dependingonthevotingrulesselected,candidatestradeplacesinthefinaloutcomeandyeteachsystemhassomereasonableclaimtob
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 外交学 论文