IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v46y1985i2p141-161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

State and prospect of public choice: A European view

Author

Listed:
  • Bruno Frey

Abstract

The victory of Public Choice may not yet have arrived, and the share of European contributions may still be small. It has nevertheless been argued that there is a great future in Public Choice. Three especially promising areas have been indicated by way of example: the theory of economic policy, politico-economic models; and International Political Economy. The European contribution to the future development of Public Choice may well consist in introducing novel aspects of human behaviour. The institutional conditions at most European universities provide for a much less strict training of students at the graduate level. The disadvantages of such a system are obvious. There may, however, also be advantages: the young researchers are less pressed into the straight-jacket of received orthodox theory, so that they have by necessity to bring forth more personal initiative and thinking. The relative advantage of European Public Choice may well lie in combining fruitful open areas with new ideas on human behaviour. Copyright Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1985

Suggested Citation

  • Bruno Frey, 1985. "State and prospect of public choice: A European view," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 141-161, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:46:y:1985:i:2:p:141-161
    DOI: 10.1007/BF00179736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00179736
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF00179736?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. Van Winden, Francesco A A M, 1980. "The Interaction between State and Firms," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 428-452, November.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Esty, Daniel C & Caves, Richard E, 1983. "Market Structure and Political Influence: New Data on Political Expenditures, Activity, and Success," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(1), pages 24-38, January.
    4. Marwell, Gerald & Ames, Ruth E., 1981. "Economists free ride, does anyone else? : Experiments on the provision of public goods, IV," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 295-310, June.
    5. Kearl, J R, et al, 1979. "A Confusion of Economists?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 28-37, May.
    6. Jean-Christian Lambelet & Urs Luterbacher & Pierre Allan, 1979. "Dynamics of Arms Races: Mutual Stimulation vs. Self-Stimulation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 4(1), pages 49-66, February.
    7. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    8. repec:bla:kyklos:v:36:y:1983:i:3:p:469-81 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Ronald Findlay & Stanislaw Wellisz, 1983. "Some Aspects of the Political Economy of Trade Restrictions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 469-481, August.
    10. Battalio, Raymond C & Kagel, John H & Rachlin, Howard & Green, Leonard, 1981. "Commodity-Choice Behavior with Pigeons as Subjects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(1), pages 67-91, February.
    11. Gordon Tullock, 1984. "A (partial) rehabilitation of the public interest theory," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 89-99, January.
    12. Mark Pauly, 1967. "Bibliography of recent works in non-market decision making," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 105-118, December.
    13. Schoemaker, Paul J H, 1982. "The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 529-563, June.
    14. Frey, Bruno S, et al, 1984. "Consensus and Dissension among Economists: An Empirical Inquiry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 986-994, December.
    15. Mueller, Dennis C, 1976. "Public Choice: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 395-433, June.
    16. Friedrich Schneider & Werner W. Pommerehne, 1981. "Free Riding and Collective Action: An Experiment in Public Microeconomics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 96(4), pages 689-704.
    17. William Mitchell, 1984. "Schumpeter and public choice, Part I: Precursor to public choice?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 73-88, January.
    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. Charles Blankart, 1987. "Presidential address Fourteen years of European Public Choice Society research," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 3-14, January.
    2. Harald Witzke, 1986. "Endogenous supranational policy decisions: The Common Agricultural Policy of the European Community," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 157-174, January.

    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. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    2. Ledyard, John O., "undated". "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research," Working Papers 861, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    3. Ruske, René & Suttner, Johannes, 2012. "Wie (un-)fair sind Ökonomen? Neue empirische Evidenz zur Marktbewertung und Rationalität," CIW Discussion Papers 03/2012, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
    4. Michele Di Maio, 2013. "Are Mainstream and Heterodox Economists Different? An Empirical Analysis," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(5), pages 1315-1348, November.
    5. Lucey, Brian M. & Delaney, Liam, 2007. "A psychological, attitudinal and professional profile of Irish economists," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 841-855, December.
    6. Kirchgassner, Gebhard, 2005. "(Why) are economists different?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 543-562, September.
    7. Peter Coughlin, 1989. "Economic policy advice and political preferences," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 201-216, June.
    8. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2014. "Behavioral public choice: A survey," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 14/03, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    9. Harin, Alexander, 2006. "Scientific Revolution? A Farewell to EconWPA. MPRA is welcome," MPRA Paper 71, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Hibbs, Douglas A, Jr, 2000. "Bread and Peace Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 104(1-2), pages 149-180, July.
    11. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    12. Christopher Prendergast, 1993. "Rationality, Optimality, and Choice," Rationality and Society, , vol. 5(1), pages 47-57, January.
    13. Ho Fai Chan & Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus & Markus Schaffner & Benno Torgler & Stephen Whyte, 2016. "External Influence as an Indicator of Scholarly Importance," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 62(1), pages 170-195.
    14. Finkelshtain, Israel & Feinerman, Eli, 1997. "Framing the Allais paradox as a daily farm decision problem: tests and explanations," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 155-167, January.
    15. Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto & Maria Petrova & Ruben Enikolopov, 2008. "The Dracula effect: voter information and trade policy," Economics Working Papers 1296, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Oct 2020.
    16. Segal, Uzi, 1987. "The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 28(1), pages 175-202, February.
    17. Richard D. Smith, 2003. "Construction of the contingent valuation market in health care:a critical assessment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(8), pages 609-628, August.
    18. Benjamin Y. Hayden & Michael L. Platt, 2009. "The mean, the median, and the St. Petersburg paradox," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(4), pages 256-272, June.
    19. Saito, Hiroharu, 2022. "Loss aversion for the value of voting rights: WTA/WTP ratios for a ballot," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    20. Nolan Ritter & Julia Anna Bingler, 2021. "Do homo sapiens know their prices? Insights on dysfunctional price mechanisms from a large field experiment," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 21/348, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.

    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:46:y:1985:i:2:p:141-161. 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.