Publish in OALib Journal
APC: Only $99
The need for stronger global coordination of environmental policies has become ever more obvious, but there are no formal arrangements in sight. The UN framework of UNEP is not delivering effective policies. Only global environmental coordination on the successful model of the World Band and the IMF can stem the rising emissions numbers and projections—quantitative voting reflecting the differences in size between the states of the world. However, the system of weighted voting typical of the WB and the IMF must be reformed in an egalitarian manner, when a global ecology organisation is set up, reducing their excessive voting power disparities. This paper suggests a simple but effective mechanism for reducing these voting power disparities, decreasing all member country votes by either the square root or the cube root expression.
The principal-agent models may be employed to elucidate central problems in interaction between principals and agents in both policy implementation and public policy-making concerning performance and remuneration. One then hits upon the double principal-agent relationships that are typical of the policy cycle, from policy-making to policy implementation and back: 1) government as principal for agents in public service delivery; 2) the population as principal for political agents under various forms of rulership.
Theories of political culture have typically refrained from a reinterpretation of the idea of civilisations, as a few well-known traditional approaches to this concept have been severely criticized. Yet, one may probe into the relevance of the concept of a set of civilisations for mankind in the period of globalisation. However, it is not the Weber thesis linking religion with modern capitalism or economic growth that appears most promising today when enquiring into cultural effects. Instead, it is the spread of respect for the rule of law regime, which has a much longer history than the democratic polity.
Theories of institutions have become very popular in the social sciences. Thus, we often encounter the claim “Institutions Matter” in the new literature, which is called “institutionalism”. It is time to make a critique of this theme, asking what an institution is and what it “matters” for. “Institution” stands for two very different sorts of entities in social reality—rules and organisations—and the new institutionalism comes in two corresponding versions, economic or atomistic neo-institutionalism against sociological or holistic neoinstitutionalism. The notion of new logic of individual behaviour—a logic of appropriateness—is flawed, as it is not in agreement with basic notions in the philosophy of action.