代写范文

留学资讯

写作技巧

论文代写专题

服务承诺

资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达

51Due提供Essay,Paper,Report,Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导,同时涵盖Personal Statement,转学申请等留学文书代写。

51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标

私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企,高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展

积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈

北美作业代写:Externality theory

2018-09-21 来源: 51due教员组 类别: Paper范文

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的paper代写范文- Externality theory,供大家参考学习,这篇论文讨论了外部性理论。外部性概念是研究外部性理论的起点,但其基本概念未澄清或者非常混乱。而学界探讨外部性理论的工具性价值定位于外部性内部化,一味强调内部化,也使外部性理论误入歧途。内部化两条路径的对立也给外部性理论发展带来不利的影响。

Externality theory,外部性理论,essay代写,paper代写,作业代写

The externality theory has been developed for more than 80 years, but it is still in a vague and chaotic state. There are three dilemmas influencing the development of externality theory: the definition of externality is unclear; The instrumental value position of externality theory is inaccurate; The perspective of externality theory, stand, value concept, fan wu is not unified. Externality theory can find its way out from the following aspects: correcting the position of externality theory; To explore new theoretical sources; Find the breakthrough of externality concept; Reposition the development direction of externality theory.

For example, based on pigou's "welfare economics", externality theory has a history of more than 80 years, but there is no unified externality theory up to now. Different scholars have different expressions of externality theory. From the basic concept to the theoretical logic system, externality theory is still in a state of confusion, vagueness and rigidity. By analyzing the predicament of the theory, the author tries to find the way out of the theory.

Inspired by Marshall's "external economy", pigou founded the externality theory, which was critically developed by coase. The discussion of externalities by these three people is called the "three milestones" in the development of externality theory.

In his principles of economics, Marshall wrote: "can we distinguish the expansion of production in the economy from two types? The second type is that the expansion of production comes from the efficiency of resource organization and management of individual enterprises. We call the former "external economy" and the latter "internal economy". This statement provides a source of thought for the formal emergence of externality theory.

Inspired by Marshall, pigou formally proposed and established the externality theory. Pigou believed that in economic activities, "externalities" exist if certain firms cause losses to other firms or to society as a whole without cost. In pigou, externality can be divided into "external economy" and "external uneconomy", while "external economy" can negatively affect the economy. Something had to be done about it, and after an examination he found a way to tax and subsidize it. Thus the externality theory can be constructed from the problem to the concept to the theoretical logic to solve the problem.

The essence of those problems mentioned by pigou, coase argues, is the reciprocity of the effects of aggression. Under this assumption, to solve or avoid the effect of infringement, the first thing is to give and clarify the right of infringement. If the right is clear, the effect of infringement can be solved through the market. From the logical starting point of negating pigou, coase thoroughly criticizes the externality theory, but it is also a significant development of externality theory.

When the externality theory reached coase, it basically stagnated. There are three dilemmas restricting the development of externality theory.

The concept of externality is the starting point of the study of externality theory. The basic concept is not clarified or very confused, so it is imaginable that it is difficult to conduct further theoretical research.

Marshall described the "external economy" in his principles of economics as "dependent on the general prosperity of the industry". This extremely sketchy description, which John Clapham calls an "empty box," argues that the real world has no counterpart to it.

After pigou in the welfare economics, proposed the "external economy" and "internal economy" concept, from the point of view of logical theories, pigou "external economy" and "internal economy" with Marshall's external economy "and" internal economy "is not corresponding, pigou refers to" external economy "and" internal economy "is not the same as Marshall refers to" external economy "and" internal economy ".

Pigou externality theory based on the marginal private cost and social cost difference theory as the point of view, on the one hand it to externality concept of a relatively clear outline, on the other hand also bind "external economy" in a relatively narrow range, forming and Marshall "external economy" described in the huge differences between things. Due to the lack of sufficient persuasiveness, pigou's externality concept and theory were quickly criticized and attacked by others. It is because of this point that later scholars who discuss the externality issue always try to get out of the scope of pigou's externality concept and theory due to the defect of pigou's externality concept and theory.

Let's look at some of the most representative representations of externality from later scholars. James mead, "a kind of external economy refers to an event like this: it makes a direct cause of the incident decision when there is no participation, perceived benefits". Bette, "it would be better for the 'externalities' to indicate the emergence of a non-pareto cost-benefit relationship when dividing costs and revenues by price." From the above two representations of externality, meade focuses on depicting externality as a cause leading to benefit gain or loss, bette focuses on depicting externality as a state and result of inefficiency, while buchanan's functional formula reflects a mutual relationship.

Later, Bamnol and Oates summarized externalities. "if the value of some real variable contained in the welfare or profit of an economic subject is selected by others, and these people do not pay special attention to the impact of their behavior on the welfare of other subjects, externalities appear. Externalities arise when there is not enough incentive for a commodity to form a potential market, and the absence of such a market leads to the optimal equilibrium of the non-pareto ". Although the statement is considered comprehensive, there are three obvious flaws: one is that a key qualifier in the statement, "not paying much attention," is a very vague term, which is fatal to the statement. Second, the second part of the statement is also ambiguous. What is commodity and market? Is the merchandise included in the eyes of someone like Mr. Coase The whole statement is also problematic. Thirdly, from the perspective of language logic, it is difficult for us to know what the externalities are.

At present, the academic world is confused about the definition of externality, which has been criticized by some economists. Tibor Scitovsky once said that "the external economic concept is one of the most puzzling concepts in the economic literature". Zhang wuchang even thought that the concept of externality was too vague and "a vague idea".

Pigou did not pay attention to the problem of externality mutual, so when talking about the solution of externality, coase criticized pigou and others' externality theory, pointing out that "traditional methods cover up the essence of the choice that has to be made". The essence of the problem in coase's opinion is that the external problems are interrelated. Coase pointed out that to solve the problem of externality mutual sex and avoid the unprincipled argument of who infringes on whom, the problem should be solved by the manpower of property right, and the definition of property right is clear.

On the one hand, coase has injected new vitality into the development of the concept and theory of externality, and on the other hand, he has exposed the root of the fundamental defects of his theory. In advocating the mutual nature of externalities, coase denies the boundary of externalities, denies the sociality of externalities, and more specifically the problem of position, principle and even class.

To sum up, the connotation of externality and the boundary of its extension have never been a unified definition acceptable to all, which is the first dilemma of the development of externality theory.

The instrumental value of the theory of externality is positioned as externality internalization. The opposition of two paths of internalization also brings adverse effects to the development of externality theory.

It pays attention to the discussion of the internalization path of externality and ignores the analysis of the necessity of internalization. The tendency in the academic world to talk about externalities is to talk about internalization. For one thing, externalities are universal, and it is almost impossible to eliminate them at a certain historical stage. Second, the existence of externalities is not equivalent to inefficiency or inefficiency. In some cases, externalities can lead to inefficiencies, but in others, they don't lead to inefficiencies, or even efficiencies. Therefore, when discussing the problem of externality internalization, the necessity analysis of externality internalization cannot be ignored. Therefore, the externality theory always tries to find a way out on the internalization of externalities, and the discussion on the necessity of the internalization of externalities is inevitably troubled.

The efficiency of the allocation of rights is noticed and the fairness of the allocation of rights is ignored. Most scholars pay too much attention to the efficiency of rights allocation while discussing the externalities, and often neglect the fairness of rights allocation. One of the original purposes of pigou's establishment of externality theory is to tilt the balance of externality to the side of equity to maximize social welfare. However, the later externality theorists, except for a few people like meade, all put the focus of externality theory on efficiency and ignored fairness. Ignoring the kernel of fair value naturally suffocates the development space of externality theory.

Most externals hold the view that externalities need to be internalized to improve economic efficiency. The biggest internal divergence of the externality theory lies in the path selection of internalization. At present, there are two major paths in the theoretical circle, the pigou path and the coase path. The pigou path refers to the path of state intervention, while the coase path refers to the market path. These two paths present a state of opposition in the academic world, and lack of communication and integration brings difficulties to the development of externality theory.

In the eyes of pigou and his followers, who are the aggressors and who are the victims have been determined, the market can not effectively resolve such violations, it is necessary for the government to intervene. However, coase and his followers think that there is no problem of who infringes on whom, and coase replaces externality with the word "effect of aggression". Since it is not clear who infringes whom, the first question of nature is to give rights of trespass to whom. As long as the right of infringement is clearly given, the problem of infringement effect can be solved through the market regulation mechanism, without state intervention. Coase is opposed to the pigouvian path, but the coase path is actually based on the pigouvian path; And the pigouvian path and the coase path are complementary. But this complementarity and internal consistency has been ignored by pigou and his successors, as well as by coase and his successors, and the whole has been in opposition, with either faction trying to prove itself more right. And it is precisely this opposition state that brings adverse effects to the development of externality theory.

Due to the confusion of the perspectives, positions and values of the study of externalities in the academic world, a new paradigm of looking at externalities has not yet been formed, which makes the development of externalities theory extremely difficult.

Different perspectives on the problem make the conclusions unlikely to be the same. Pigou thinks the market is flawed, and he sees the government as a proxy for the public. As meade, bette and buchanan have different perspectives on externalities, their definitions of externalities and interpretations of externalities are also different. In some scholars of the school of property right, the concept or even theory of externality is actually worthless, so the theory of externality from the perspective of property right cannot be the same as that of state intervention. Without a scientific, reasonable and comprehensive view of external problems, it is difficult to give a correct conclusion.

After decades of development, the externality theory basically became rigid in coase's place. Three dilemmas hindering the development of externality theory can be found by carefully analyzing the specific reasons. If the academic circle can boldly break through the original range of theory, externality theory will have a large space for development.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明:原创paper代写范文源自编辑创作,未经官方许可,网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为,未经同意的情况下,51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的paper代写服务,亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多paper代写范文 提供作业代写服务,详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041。

上一篇:北美作业代写:Financial risk manageme 下一篇:北美作业代写:State capitalism