| 1. |
- Wicks, Rick, 1946
(författare)
-
A model of dynamic balance among the three spheres of society - markets, govenments, and communities: Applied to understanding the relative importance of social capital and social goods
- 2009
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Social Economics. ; 36:5, s. 535-565
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The purpose of this paper is to revisit old questions of the proper subject and bounds of economics: does economics study "provisioning"? or markets? or a method of reasoning, self-interested rational optimization? A variety of scholars and others in many fields make use of a taxonomy of society consisting of three "spheres": markets, governments, and communities. It is argued here that this tripartite taxonomy of society is fundamental and exhaustive. A variety of ways of understanding this taxonomy are explored, especially Fiske's "Relational models theory." Then - after communities and their products, social goods, are defined more thoroughly - a visual model of interactions among the three spheres is presented. The model is first used briefly to understand the historical development of markets. The model is then applied to understanding how economic thinking and market ideology, including the notion of social capital, can be destructive of communities and their production of social goods (and their production of social capital as well). It is not possible to measure these effects monetarily, so calculating precisely "how this affects results" in a standard economic model is impossible. Nevertheless, better preparation of students for real-world analysis, and better serving the clients, including the public, if - whenever relevant, such as in textbook introductions and in benefit/cost analyses - awareness of the limitations of economic analysis with respect to communities and social goods was made. The three-spheres model offered here, based on Fiske's "Relational models theory," facilitates this awareness.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Wicks, Rick, 1946
(författare)
-
Modeling the Effects of Economic Behavior in Determining the Organization of Society
- 2006
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The three "spheres" of society (governments, markets, and communities) are widely acknowledged yet the overall organization is analyzed only rarely, and interactions between the spheres have perhaps never been modeled. Fiske´s four relational models (community-sharing, authority-ranking, equality-matching, and marketpricing) are used as the theoretical underpinning for a model of these three spheres, which is then used briefly to examine the effects of economic behavior (including economic thinking and theorizing) in determining the balance between them. Each of the spheres is assumed to have a fairly fixed core, plus some space between the cores which may be designated to one or another sphere. In the long run, this designation may reflect meta-economic efficiency, influenced by changes in physical, social, psychological, and information-technology. In the short run, however, the outcome depends on human choice and will, in evaluating uncertain information about technologies and the meta-economic efficiency of changing sphereassignments (including possible changing cultural and historical differences in the relative evaluation of public, private, and social goods produced in the three spheres). It can thus be influenced by ideology, specifically through the application of inappropriate relational models to any particular social function or situation. For example, applying economic thinking to communities may undermine them, especially if the social sphere of communities operating under its own relational models is not acknowledged.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Wicks, Rick, 1946
(författare)
-
Stylebook:Tips on Organization, Writing, and Formatting
- 2008
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Fifteen years of copy-editing experience ? with theses (both in economics and in several medical fields), journal articles, book chapters and books, conference presentations, government reports, etc. ? are distilled here. Papers are often sent to me for ?language correction?, but what I usually find is that, far more than that, what they most need is major work on organization, writing, and formatting (including presentation of tables and figures). Even good writers can improve their writing by paying attention to the points herein, I believe. Of course digging deeply into issues of organization, writing, and even formatting improves readability (and thus the probability of being published, read, and cited), but it can also help to improve the quality of the thinking, i.e., the content of the paper. I first review the standard organization of most empirical papers in economics, with suggestions for improvement (including a brief discussion of some issues in reporting of statistical and econometric results). Then I discuss many points of good (and bad) writing (including sections on The Language of Economists and on Overused/Misused Words) as well as points of formatting (including many choices, where ? even more than in writing ? consistency is the most important rule). Throughout, some differences between Swedish and English practice are discussed, as well as some between American and British practice.
|
|
| 7. |
- Wicks, Rick, 1946
(författare)
-
The Place of Conventional Economics in a World with Communities and Social Goods
- 2012
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Paper 1: Should Deliveries of Used Clothes to LDCs Be Supported? This is the journal version of a study of the worldwide used-clothes trade – with focus on Sweden’s participation in it – undertaken for Sida (the Swedish foreign aid agency). We looked at both theoretical and empirical effects of the commercial used-clothes trade, and at the effects of subsidizing it. We basically concluded that, while markets work, there was no need to subsidize them under normal conditions because – even given the goal of helping the poor – there might well be better uses of the money. There might be an argument for subsidized used-clothes exports in dealing with an emergency where supply had broken down, but even then most NGOs prefer to supply new clothes. Paper 2: A Model of Dynamic Balance Among the Three Spheres of Society – Markets, Governments, and Communities – Applied to Understanding the Relative Importance of Social Capital and Social Goods This paper revisits old questions of the proper subject and bounds of economics: Does economics study “provisioning”? or markets? or a method of reasoning, self-interested rational optimization? A variety of scholars and others in many fields make use of a taxonomy of society consisting of three “spheres”: markets, governments, and communities. It is argued here that this tripartite taxonomy of society is fundamental and exhaustive. A variety of ways of understanding this taxonomy are explored, especially Fiske’s (1991, 2004) Relational Models theory. Then – after communities and their products, social goods, are defined more thoroughly – a visual model of interactions among the three spheres is presented. The model is first used briefly to understand the historical development of markets. The model is then applied to understanding how economic thinking and market ideology, including the notion of social capital, can be destructive of communities and their production of social goods (and their production of social capital as well). It’s not possible to measure these effects monetarily, so calculating precisely “how this affects results” in a standard economic model is impossible. Nevertheless we could better prepare students for real-world analysis, and better serve our clients, including the public, if – whenever relevant, such as in textbook introductions and in benefit/cost analyses – we made them aware of the limitations of economic analysis with respect to communities and social goods. The three-spheres model offered here, based on Fiske’s Relational Models theory, facilitates this awareness. Paper 3: Assumption without Representation: The Unacknowledged Abstraction from Communities and Social Goods This paper repeats a lot of the same information and argument as in Paper 2, in abbreviated form, before exploring the multitude of methodological problems caused by the unacknowledged abstraction from communities and social goods and suggesting remedies, as well as benefits to be derived from applying those remedies. Paper 4: Markets, Governments – and Communities! This paper again repeats a lot before exploring how the unacknowledged abstraction from communities and social goods occurred, various ways in which it can be understood, and again the problems it causes, possible remedies, and their benefits.
|
|
| 8. |
- Wicks, Rick, 1946
(författare)
-
The Three Spheres of Society - Markets, Governments, and Communities - Related to Fiske's Four Relational Modes:Modeled in dynamic balance explaining why social goods are more important than social capital
- 2008
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Social scientists, journalists, and others typically refer to three social "spheres": markets, governments, and communities - whether based on kinship, location, or belief. This taxonomy is here related to Fiske's (1991) relational modes (RMs): Community-Sharing, Authority-Ranking, Equality-Matching, and Market-Pricing, which display fundamental cumulative mathematical characteristics, and develop spontaneously in children (regardless of the emphasis in the surrounding culture); in the same order; and at about the same ages. CS identifies communities, while EM adds an alternative mode of community resource-transfer (fairness, equality). Governments and markets apparently differentiated from the primordial community sphere to express other modes: AR in governments, and MP in markets. Each sphere is assumed to have an essential core, beyond which it can expand if and as other spheres shrink. In the long run, the size of each sphere may reflect changing social, psychological, and physical (including information) technologies; changing cultural preferences for the private, public, and social goods (and social capital) produced in the three spheres; and some resulting meta-economic efficiency. In the short to medium run, however, the outcome depends on human will and choice in evaluating uncertain information about technologies, preferences, and efficiency. The outcome can thus be influenced by ideology, including through the application of inappropriate RMs. Communities produce social goods, including a sense of identity, meaning, and purpose; feelings of kindness, companionship, and love; and much more. Although social goods can be private, they are inherently non-marketable, so they are distinct from typical private goods. Similarly, although social goods can be public, most cannot be produced by governments, so they are distinct from typical public goods. Analogously to physical capital, social capital ? also produced by communities - can be understood as a factor of production of either private or public goods. Valuing social capital instrumentally (an MP value), as recent economic theory has done, can thus be destructive of the source of social capital, communities. Economic theory - and economists - could contribute to the maintenance and development of this third sphere of communities and social goods by simply acknowledging its distinct RMs and its omission from their usual analyses.
|
|
| 9. |
- Wicks, Rick, 1946
(författare)
-
The Unacknowledged Abstraction from Social Goods
- 2004
-
Ingår i: Presented at the 2004 joint conference "Private Powers and Public Domains: Redefining Relations Among States, Markets, and Societies" of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE) and the Communitarian Summit, Washington, D.C., USA.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 10. |
- Wicks, Rick, 1946
(författare)
-
Used Clothes and Social Goods: Two economic problems
- 2003
-
Licentiatavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- PAPER 1: Used Clothes As Development Aid: The political economy of rags Report of a study for Sida (the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency) by Rick Wicks and Arne Bigsten Abstract: Should Swedish used-clothes exports continue to be subsidized as development aid? Theoretical analysis and review of empirical evidence regarding effects of both commercial and charitable (subsidized) used-clothes imports in LDCs. Includes statistics on the world used-clothes trade, including 127 gross used-clothes-exporting countries and 181 importing countries in 1990 (with values, weights, average prices, and weights-per-capita), and some specifics of U.S. and Swedish imports and exports. Discussion of images of the trade in labor and popular media; trends in national trade policies and practices; NGO attitudes and involvement; similar issues with food aid; and excerpts regarding the trade in 18th-century Britain. Conclusion: Greater benefits are possible for poor people with a more imaginative approach. Poor people who need clothes need many things. Used clothes can be sold and the proceeds used, along with erstwhile subsidy funds, for income-generating projects. A possible exception: if supply has broken down due to catastrophe, and clothing is not available in the market. PAPER 2: Economic Theory and the Social Realm: Communities and Social Goods by Rick Wicks Abstract: The social realm of communities and social goods is defined and their importance and motivations are explored. Largely because of effects related to markets, many observers see the social realm as in distress, perhaps even at the end of a 10,000 year epoch, with no clear way forward. Communities are affected by scarce marketable (and public) goods, and the social goods which communities produce are themselves scarce, while, on the other hand, markets -- and even the study of economics -- seem to affect the provision of communities and social goods. Thus there is a scientific puzzle: Economics is variously defined as either 1) the study of choice under scarcity constraints, or 2) the study of markets. Logically and empirically, then, economic theory -- including especially welfare economics -- must include communities and social goods, but, with minor exceptions, it has entirely left them out. How and why communities and social goods have been left out of economic theory are explored, and various methodological (and public) complaints about economic theory are related to this "oversight". A number of unfortunate rhetorical consequences of the omission of communities and social goods
|
|
