JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
Noch mehr zur Meritorik
Tietzel, Manfred | Müller, Christian
Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 118 (1998), Iss. 1 : pp. 87–127
4 Citations (CrossRef)
Additional Information
Article Details
Tietzel, Manfred
Müller, Christian
Cited By
-
Meritorics and Economic Sociodynamics: Debates with R. Musgrave
Rubinstein, A.
Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. (2009), Iss. 11 P.98
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2009-11-98-109 [Citations: 3] -
Steuerungs- und Regelungsprobleme in der Informationsgesellschaft
Ökonomik der Steuerungs- und Regelungsmöglichkeiten des Mediensystems — Rezipientenorientierung der Kontrolle
Heinrich, Jürgen
1999
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-12385-9_19 [Citations: 2] -
Public Interests and the Theory of Public Goods
Rubinstein, A.
Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. (2007), Iss. 10 P.90
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2007-10-90-113 [Citations: 4] -
"Groups and Their Interests": The Point for Discussion <i>(Foreword by R. Grinberg)</i>
Rubinstein, A.
Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. (2006), Iss. 11 P.79
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2006-11-79-94 [Citations: 1]
Abstract
"Merit goods", since the notion came into being in 1957, have persistently remained thorns in the neoclassical economist's flesh. In the paper we first try to specify the very notion of a "merit good" and to identify the welfare effects connected with their provision. We then proceed to analyze the arguments usually put forward to justify their public provision. The analysis presumes acceptance of normative individualism and predominantly assumes a constitutional perspective. We come to the following conclusions: (1) what is defensible in the theory of merit goods is not novel and covered more convincingly by other theories; (2) what is novel in the theory of merit goods is indefensible from an individualistic point of view.