IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v23y2000i1p105-113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How stakeholders with various preferences converge on acceptable investment programs

Author

Listed:
  • Kelvin, Alex

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelvin, Alex, 2000. "How stakeholders with various preferences converge on acceptable investment programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 105-113, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:23:y:2000:i:1:p:105-113
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(99)00047-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bennett, James T & Dilorenzo, Thomas J, 1983. "The Ricardian Equivalence Theorem: Evidence from the Off-Budget Public Sector," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 38(2), pages 309-316.
    2. Buchanan, James M, 1976. "Barro on the Ricardian Equivalence Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(2), pages 337-342, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Krutilla Kerry & Alexeev Alexander, 2012. "The Normative Implications of Political Decision-Making for Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-36, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. António Afonso, 2007. "An Avenue for Expansionary Fiscal Contractions," The IUP Journal of Public Finance, IUP Publications, vol. 0(3), pages 7-15, August.
    2. Elmendorf, Douglas W. & Gregory Mankiw, N., 1999. "Government debt," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 25, pages 1615-1669, Elsevier.
    3. Ahmad Zubaidi Baharumshah & Evan Lau, 2005. "Budget and Current Account Deficits in SEACEN Countries: Evidence Based on the Panel Approach," International Finance 0504002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Ekkehart Schlicht, 2013. "Unexpected Consequences of Ricardian Expectations," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 498-512, July.
    5. Maran Marimuthu & Hanana Khan & Romana Bangash, 2022. "Comparative Study on Lower-Middle-, Upper-Middle-, and Higher-Income Economies of ASEAN for Fiscal and Current Account Deficits: A Panel Econometric Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(18), pages 1-23, September.
    6. Alpha C. Chiang & Stephen M. Miller, 1998. "The Perception of Government Bonds and Money as Net Wealth: An Integrated Approach," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 24(4), pages 435-448, Fall.
    7. Talknice Saungweme & Nicholas M. Odhiambo, 2019. "Does Public Debt Impact Economic Growth in Zambia? An Ardl-Bounds Testing Approach," SPOUDAI Journal of Economics and Business, SPOUDAI Journal of Economics and Business, University of Piraeus, vol. 69(4), pages 53-73, October-D.
    8. Jeffrey Carmichael & Kim Hawtrey, 1981. "Social Security, Government Finance, and Savings," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 57(4), pages 332-343, December.
    9. Mico Apostolov & Dusko Josevski, 2016. "Aggregate Demand–Inflation Adjustment Model Applied to Southeast European Economies," Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice, Central bank of Montenegro, vol. 5(1), pages 141-157.
    10. Visser, H., 1987. "A survey of recent developments in monetary theory," Serie Research Memoranda 0003, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    11. Aqdas Ali Kazmi, 1994. "Private Consumption, Government Spending, Debt Neutrality: Resolving Kormendi- Feldstein-Modigliani Controversy," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 1055-1071.
    12. Saima Sarwar, 2015. "Revisiting Ricardian Equivalence Hypothesis (REH) For Pakistan Using Money Demand Function Approach," Journal of Empirical Economics, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 4(3), pages 154-166.
    13. Al-Jahwari, Salim Ahmed Said, 2021. "Does the Twin-Deficits doctrine apply to the Gulf Cooperation Council? A dynamic panel VAR-X model approach," MPRA Paper 111232, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Lefteris Tsoulfidis, 2007. "Classical economists and public debt," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 54(1), pages 1-12, March.
    15. Jarmulska, Barbara, 2016. "Analiza stabilności fiskalnej w Polsce w latach 1995-2014 [The Analysis of Fiscal Stability in Poland in the Years 1995-2014]," MPRA Paper 100830, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Gianluigi Giorgioni & Ken Holden, 2003. "Ricardian equivalence, expansionary fiscal contraction and the stock market: a VECM approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(12), pages 1435-1443.
    17. Ahmad Baharumshah & Evan Lau & Ahmed Khalid, 2006. "Testing Twin Deficits Hypothesis using VARs and Variance Decomposition," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 331-354.
    18. Enrico Saltari & Willi Semmler & Giovanni Di Bartolomeo, 2022. "A Nash Equilibrium for Differential Games with Moving-Horizon Strategies," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 60(3), pages 1041-1054, October.
    19. Barro, Robert J, 1989. "The Ricardian Approach to Budget Deficits," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 37-54, Spring.
    20. Lefteris Tsoulfidis, 2013. "Public Debt and J.S. Mill?s Conjecture: A Note," HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT AND POLICY, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(2), pages 93-102.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:23:y:2000:i:1:p:105-113. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.