IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v37y1981i1p61-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic arms limitation treaties and innovations in weapons technology

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Mackay

Abstract

The Brito and Intriligator paper is an ambitious and provocative piece of work. The lack of a satisfactory theoretical model of the interactions between the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the bureaucratic apparatus is one of the major shortcomings of modern political economy. In general, efforts by political theorists to remedy this deficiency should be encouraged. The present authors, in particular, should be encouraged to continue their line of research, refining and further developing their political model, while applying it to other important policy areas. Copyright Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1981

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Mackay, 1981. "Strategic arms limitation treaties and innovations in weapons technology," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 61-68, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:37:y:1981:i:1:p:61-68
    DOI: 10.1007/BF00124232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00124232
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF00124232?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Bush, Winston C. & Mayer, Lawrence S., 1974. "Some implications of anarchy for the distribution of property," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 401-412, August.
    2. Thomas Romer & Howard Rosenthal, 1978. "Political resource allocation, controlled agendas, and the status quo," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 27-43, December.
    3. Denzau, Arthur T & Mackay, Robert J, 1980. "A Model of Benefit and Tax Share Discrimination by a Monopoly Bureau," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 341-368, June.
    4. Wagner, Richard E & Weber, Warren E, 1975. "Competition, Monopoly, and the Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 661-684, December.
    5. Denzau, Arthur T. & Mackay, Robert J., 1980. "A model of benefit and tax share discrimination by a monopoly bureau," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 341-368, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Donald Haurin & H. Gill, 1984. "The spatial distribution of public services: A structural model of voting, educational production, and the government's allocation of educational inputs," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 481-500, January.
    2. Allan Feldman, 1985. "A model of majority voting and growth in government expenditure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 3-17, January.
    3. Kenneth Greene, 1984. "Sequential referenda and bureaucratic man," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 77-82, January.
    4. Zach Raff, 2023. "Identifying the regulator’s objective: Does political support matter?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(3), pages 277-295, March.
    5. Peter Hartley & Chris Trengove, 1986. "Who Benefits from Public Utilities?," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 62(2), pages 163-179, June.
    6. Lars-Erik Borge, 1996. "The Behavior of Bureaucrats and the Choice Between Single-Purpose and Multi-Purpose Authorities," Public Finance Review, , vol. 24(2), pages 173-191, April.
    7. Anesi, Vincent & Duggan, John, 2018. "Existence and indeterminacy of markovian equilibria in dynamic bargaining games," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    8. Deniz Aksoy, 2010. "Who gets what, when, and how revisited: Voting and proposal powers in the allocation of the EU budget," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(2), pages 171-194, June.
    9. Timothy Besley & Rohini Pande & Vijayendra Rao, 2012. "Just Rewards? Local Politics and Public Resource Allocation in South India," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 26(2), pages 191-216.
    10. Perry Shapiro & Jon Sonstelie, 1982. "Representative voter or bureaucratic manipulation: An examination of public finances in California before and after Proposition 13," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 113-142, January.
    11. Daniel Diermeier & Pohan Fong, 2011. "Bargaining over the budget," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 36(3), pages 565-589, April.
    12. Peter T. Leeson, 2009. "The Laws of Lawlessness," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 471-503, June.
    13. Ansink, Erik & Gengenbach, Michael & Weikard, Hans-Peter, 2012. "River Sharing and Water Trade," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 122860, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    14. Jorge M. Streb & Daniel Lema & Gustavo Torrens, 2009. "Checks and Balances on Political Budget Cycles: Cross‐Country Evidence," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 426-447, August.
    15. Parker Hevron, 2018. "Judicialization and Its Effects: Experiments as a Way Forward," Laws, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, May.
    16. Bowen, T. Renee & Chen, Ying & Eraslan, Hülya & Zápal, Jan, 2017. "Efficiency of flexible budgetary institutions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 148-176.
    17. Randall Holcombe, 2005. "Government growth in the twenty-first century," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 95-114, July.
    18. Stutzer Alois & Frey Bruno S., 2006. "Making International Organizations More Democratic," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(3), pages 305-330, January.
    19. Kenneth Shepsle & Barry Weingast, 1981. "Structure-induced equilibrium and legislative choice," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 503-519, January.
    20. Diermeier, Daniel & Fong, Pohan, 2012. "Characterization of the von Neumann–Morgenstern stable set in a non-cooperative model of dynamic policy-making with a persistent agenda setter," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 349-353.

    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:kap:pubcho:v:37:y:1981:i:1:p:61-68. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.