To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Opinion polls indicate that many people in the UK are concerned about wildlife declines and about overpopulation. These feelings are widely shared by naturalists, scientists, artists and many religious groups, as well as by the general public. Unfortunately, such views are uncommon among economists and rarely feature at all in politics. Discussion of population pressure has remained largely taboo, even in wildlife circles, presumably because of fear of causing offence. However, there are adverse consequences for society from a high human population that go far beyond problems for wildlife and countryside. Traffic jams are health hazards, both physically and mentally,and infrastructure expansions generate stress for those affected by them, while public services including healthcare and education are increasingly overwhelmed by people needing to use them.
This chapter is diagnostic in nature and marks a turn toward a normative assessment. It argues that we continue to experience high levels of distrust in government for three reasons. First, it observes that, however dark our current circumstances, the counterfactual in which the legislature is more active in lawmaking is darker still. Second, it points out that the scope of government activity has changed markedly over the last century, with the government edging into policy areas that may be comparatively difficult to build trust in. Third, and most relevant to the book’s thesis, the present state deviates from the theory in a variety of ways. For instance, administrative agencies increasingly favor thinly proceduralized actions, often at the expense of transparency, deliberation and public reasoning. Likewise, an ideology of presidential control over the administrative state threatens the space necessary for the reasoning state to thrive. Privatization of public roles, similarly, jeopardizes the place of the reasoning state.
Chapter 6 is an analysis of human–elephant conflict in Northern Botswana. Here, autonomy has a very different role in the making of the conflict, as the autonomy that is given priority is the autonomy of people outside of direct contact with elephants and often outside of the country and continent itself. The chapter demonstrates that the promotion of autonomy between people is not equal and is interrelated with other dominations involving race, gender, culture and status. In Botswana, this means that responses to human–elephant conflict are often dictated by people who do not have any direct experience with the conflict and do not have to bear the everyday cost of living with conflict. A cursory analysis of these responses suggests that there has been an attempt to build resilience to vulnerability, as the state has implemented measures that are prima facie consistent with a vulnerability approach. However, the case study shows that even genuine resilience measures can be ineffective when there is a lack of collaboration in their design and implementation and when the money and power is held elsewhere.
Chapter 4 presents international wildlife law as an institutional governance system relevant to local responses to human–wildlife conflict. It finds that there is a lack of any real ‘conflict’ language within the framework and this limits the ability of international law to deal with the problem at the outset. Further, the value orientations discussed within Chapters 2 and 3 are all present in international wildlife law to some extent and so the framework has the same conflict of values that are present in situations of human–wildlife conflict. The chapter traces the development of ‘dominance’ in international law and finds that there are specific principles and legal developments that continue to prevent a positive relationship that is beneficial to both people and wildlife. In addition, the underlying constraints of capitalism, neo-liberalism and sustainable development are discussed. Finally, this part posits that the failure of international law to implement a meaningful interpretation of intrinsic value and animal welfare has meant that such language has not been able to minimise the damage done by the dominant framework. The chapter concludes with suggestions for eco-vulnerability principles to be incorporated into international law.
Introducing susceptible-infected-recovered epidemiology dynamics with vaccines into an endogenous growth model, we investigate the impact of government infectious disease policy on macroeconomic performance. We find that any expenditure that improves health, whether to reduce the contact rate or increase the recovery rate or the vaccination rate, and regardless of whether it comes directly from the households or the government, has a positive impact on economic growth, but does not necessarily improve the welfare. The reason people’s health has improved but their welfare has fallen is because government expenditures must be covered by taxes, which will reduce their disposable income and consumption.
This article examines Rockefeller Republicanism and its status within the Republican Party by looking at the evolution of Nelson Rockefeller’s support for social welfare policy between 1958 and 1975. New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller regularly appears in histories of modern conservatism as the embodiment of the liberalism that conservatives rejected, but these works rarely account for the entirety of Rockefeller’s career. Rather than focus on Rockefeller’s challenges to the national Republican Party in 1960 and 1964, which results in an incomplete representation of Rockefeller Republicanism, this article reassesses moderate Republicanism’s perceived dominance and Rockefeller’s advocacy for liberal domestic policies and commitment to racial liberalism in New York. A full account of Rockefeller’s struggles to find common ground with conservative New York Republicans and adoption of conservative positions related to law enforcement and welfare reform thwarted one of the GOP’s best opportunities to assemble a multiracial and cross-class constituency.
The repeated circulation of anti-welfare discourses has served to encourage limited and often incorrect public understandings of issues pertaining to welfare. Central to these processes is the social construction of notions of ‘deservedness’ and ‘undeservedness.’ In this article we examine the 2017 ‘Welfare Cheats, Cheat Us All’ (original emphasis) campaign initiated by the Department of Social Protection in the Republic of Ireland. We present our analysis of the dominant discourses evident in the campaign itself and the in-house discussions in the lead up to the campaign. Our article shows that this Irish campaign rehearses a familiar international discourse which follows distinct patterns or rules, and we evidence, in keeping with other moral panics, the spurious nature of the data being used to exaggerate the scale and extent of welfare ‘fraud’.
For any field of law, the goal it was designed to achieve permeates every aspect of its application and interpretation. This is particularly true when the black letter of the law is cryptic and silent on most aspects of how it should be interpreted and applied, as is the case with competition law, which for the most part revolves around a small number of highly abstract provisions. It is only natural then that ample scholarly work has been devoted to identifying the goals and purposes of competition law. By and large these attempts have been textual, historical, and teleological. We introduce here instead a quantitative analysis of the case law and present the results of the first empirical study into the goals and purposes of EU competition law as they emerge from the entirety of the case law of the European Court of Justice, opinions of the Advocate Generals, Commission decisions, and speeches of Commissioners for Competition. This body of almost 4,000 sources paints a comprehensive picture of the underlying goals of EU competition law, and helps conclusively confirm some previous insights while debunking others, thereby helping to advance the present application and future evolution of competition law.
Cass Sunstein's contention that evolutionary explanations for behavioural economic phenomena are of limited relevance to public policy – and his support for soft paternalism – rests on his view that policymakers ought to be pursuing increases in some overarching social planning conception of welfare. In this reply to Sunstein, I argue that people have differing and multifarious desires in life, with the social planner's conception of welfare being, at best, perhaps only a partial consideration for most people. The phenomena that behavioural economists and psychologists have empirically observed may well facilitate people in the pursuit of their own desires in life. Consequently, paternalistic manipulation or coercion to save people from themselves is questionable in the behavioural public policy space, but government intervention is warranted when one party implicitly or explicitly uses these phenomena to exploit others.
Meaningfulness is a matter of what adds meaning to our lives. What confers positive meaning (meaning makers) on our lives is our achievements, while negative meaning results from our failures. Dying has positive meaning for us if and only if, and to the extent that, living on has negative meaning for us, and vice versa. Meaning makers are a species of welfare makers, so what gives my life meaning also makes it better for me, but it is entirely possible to have a good life that is devoid of meaning. One excellent reason to live is to achieve things, to give my life meaning, but it is not the only good reason, since I have a very clear reason to live on when the life in prospect is good for me. We need not limit our aims to things we might achieve solely as individuals. We can share goals with others, even with people who have yet to be born. In particular, we can strive, together, to develop ways in which people may enhance themselves.
Having prudential interests is a matter of possessing features, such as the ability to feel pain and pleasure, by which an organism can be concerned about itself. Some organisms lack such features. Sponges have no welfare apparatus; they are unresponsive. A responsive organism may acquire things that are intrinsically good or bad for it. These determine its welfare level, whether over a brief interval of time or over a lifetime, which, in turn, determines whether something is overall good or bad for it. An event or state of affairs E is overall good (bad) for us just if, and to the extent that, the intrinsic value for us of the actual world, in which E occurs, is higher (lower) than that of the closest world in which E does not occur. If the intrinsic value for me of a world w equals my lifetime welfare level in w, then coming into existence, and coming to be responsive, was neither good nor bad for me. If we assume that the intrinsic value for me of a world in which I am unresponsive is 0, then it was good for me to come into existence and to become responsive.
The practices adopted in dairy farms can positively or negatively affect the perception of consumers. To meet consumer expectations and improve the productivity of dairy farms, a welfare certification system has recently been initiated in Brazil. In this research communication we describe the perceptions of Brazilian consumers and farmers regarding the implementation of welfare certification systems and the most common practices that affect animal welfare on dairy farms. For this purpose, two semi-structured questionnaires were used: one applied to 409 consumers and the other to 158 dairy farmers. The results demonstrate that consumers are concerned with the adoption of welfare practices in animal husbandry at dairy farms, mainly on topics related to movement restriction and cow-calf separation. Thus, the majority of consumers state that they are willing to pay more for welfare-certified dairy products. In addition, most dairy farmers are interested in adopting a welfare certification system, especially if it could add value to the raw milk sold to industries. Veterinarians and animal scientists are important for disseminating animal welfare recommendations, and the consequences of its improper adoption need to be emphasized. Finally, dairy farms need improvements regarding environmental hygiene, thermal conditions, animal husbandry, health, and milking processes. In conclusion, consumers and farmers are interested in welfare systems and their certification, and there is a need for stakeholders to make welfare certification a reality in the Brazilian dairy supply chain.
Dairy cattle breeding has historically focused on relatively small numbers of elite bulls as sires of sons. In recent years, even if generation intervals were reduced and more diverse sires of sons could have been selected, genomic selection has not fundamentally changed the fact that a large number of individuals are being analyzed. However, a relatively small number of elite bulls are still siring those animals. Therefore inbreeding-derived negative consequences in the gene pool have brought concern. The detrimental effects of non-additive genetic changes such as inbreeding depression and dominance have been widely disseminated while seriously affecting bioeconomically important parameters because of an antagonistic relationship between dairy production and reproductive traits. Therefore, the estimation of benefits and limitations of inbreeding and variance of the selection response deserves to be evaluated and discussed to preserve genetic variability, a significant concern in the selection of individuals for reproduction and production. Short-term strategies for genetic merit improvement through modern breeding programs have severely lowered high-producing dairy cattle fertility potential. Since the current selection programs potentially increase long-term costs, genetic diversity has decreased globally as a consequence. Therefore, a greater understanding of the potential that selection programs have for supporting long-term genetic sustainability and genetic diversity among dairy cattle populations should be prioritized in managing farm profitability. The present review provides a broad approach to current inbreeding-derived problems, identifying critical points to be solved and possible alternative strategies to control selection against homozygous haplotypes while maintaining sustained selection pressure. Moreover, this manuscript explores future perspectives, emphasizing theoretical applications and critical points, and strategies to avoid the adverse effects of inbreeding in dairy cattle. Finally, this review provides an overview of challenges that will soon require multidisciplinary approaches to managing dairy cattle populations, intending to combine increases in productive trait phenotypes with improvements in reproductive, health, welfare, linear conformation, and adaptability traits into the foreseeable future.
That older people should be consumers and active agents has dominated policy discourse across health, social care and housing that has a core care function. This discourse has some established and long-standing critics, such as Gilleard and Higgs, and yet the central question(s) a consumerist discourse raises remains surprisingly relevant today. The purpose of this forum article is to reconsider the viability of active agency amongst older people in the context of empirical research on information-giving across health, social care and housing that has been published since the paper by Gilleard and Higgs in 1998. Information-giving is the key consumer choice mechanism, and yet research is currently located in separate literatures. Giving these separate fields some coherence engages with and provides important empirical commentary. There is little or no evidence that information alone triggers active agency for older people in regard to their health, social care or housing. However, there is consistent evidence that discussion, deliberation and dialogue – or the practices associated with Habermas’ theory of communicative action – are desirable to older people in the context of active agency. More research is needed to demonstrate efficacy beyond communicative approaches being desirable.
We explore how tax evasion by firms affects the growth- and welfare-maximizing rates of corporate income tax (CIT) in an endogenous growth model with productive public service. We show that the negative effect of CIT on growth is mitigated in the presence of tax evasion. This increases the benefit of raising the CIT rate for public service provision. Thus, in contrast to Barro [(1990) Journal of Political Economy 98, 103–125], the optimal tax rate is higher than the output elasticity of public service. Through numerical exercises, we demonstrate that the role of tax evasion by firms is quantitatively significant.
This chapter considers the Soviet conception and implementation of a highly distinctive scheme of social rights from its foundation in the 1920s through the 1960s to the 1980s. The state which ostensibly took those rights to their highest degree of realisation in the twentieth century presents a particularly instructive history, but one that destabilises and confounds received categories and trajectories. As heirs to the emancipatory ambitions of eighteenth-century Jacobins and nineteenth-century labour movements, the Bolsheviks pursued a highly distinctive mode of conceptualising and implementing social and economic protection. Fraught and contradictory, it encompassed sweeping labour protection and ruthless labour repression. Its unmatched scope and depth of social provision was marred by problematic enforcement, backstopping and justiciability, the state conceiving itself as having transcended both the market and social classes. The Soviet Constitution eschewed ‘class-abatement’ (which T. H. Marshall espoused) as the objective of social welfare, while also rejecting the notion that social rights should be actionable (contra the Weimar jurists’ ‘social rule of law’).
This chapter traces the origins of today’s Japanese precariat class back to the post–Second World War development of the Japanese ‘welfare society’ – an alternative model to the West’s ‘welfare state’. The Japanese Constitution of 1945, promulgated in the wake of the country’s defeat, included social rights, but tethered them to an older, traditional concept – never before legislated – of the ‘right to existence’ (seizonken). Efforts were made after the war to investigate working-class conditions and devise social policies favourable to meeting the needs of workers and their families. But strong opposition to unionism, socialism and the welfare state bent these efforts towards a non-state model of social solidarity, one that saw the individual as belonging to a company and family – what came to be called a ‘welfare society’ by the late 1970s. By that time, only full-time male workers receiving monthly salaries benefited from the socio-economic policies of the immediate post-war era; women were excluded. Thus, decades before the advent of neo-liberalism, social rights were being undermined, workplace hierarchies were being created, and the rise of the precariat was underway.
It is now well acknowledged that socio-economic rights were already recognised and defended at the time of the French Revolution. The aim of this chapter is not simply to extend the genealogy of socio-economic rights farther back. I wish to show that both socio-economic and political rights, during the French Revolution, came from the same intellectual source, namely the belief in a naturally regulated economic sphere. This belief would find its peak expression in Physiocracy, but it also informed a number of other liberal movements. Going back to the late seventeenth century, one even finds the assertion of socio-economic rights before that of political ones. Economic liberalism, in this sense, came before, but also paved the way for, political liberalism. This process extended up to the French Revolution, where it was deputies with strong Physiocratic attachments who pushed for both socio-economic and political rights.
Contracting of social services has been adopted in China as an innovation in welfare provision. This article reviews the emerging literature on contracting of services to social organisations in China in order to identify lines of further enquiry. It reviews research published in the English and Chinese languages up to 2018. We identify three distinct narratives: public sector reform, improvement of welfare service quality and capacity, and transformation of state-society relations. We contrast the identified narratives with the empirical evidence produced for the Chinese case. We demonstrate that, despite contradictory empirical evidence, the premise that contracting improves public sector efficiency and quality of services predominates. The narrative that contracting transforms state-society relations is contested. This article contributes to the understanding of how contracting of services is justified in theory and practice, and proposes an agenda for future social policy research on contracting of services to social organisations in China.
This Element provides an opinionated introduction to the debate in moral philosophy over identifying the basic elements of well-being and to the related debate over the nature of happiness. The question of the nature of happiness is simply the question of what happiness is (as opposed to what causes it or how to get it), and the central philosophical question about well-being is the question of what things are in themselves of ultimate benefit or harm to a person, or directly make them better or worse off.