The New Public Finance

Kaul, Inge; Conceiçāo, Pedro

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195179972.001.0001

Cited by 64 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 204 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In 1999, the book "Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the XXI Century" was published by German economists (Kaul et al, 1999), which became a starting point for further research and discussions in different political circles, at summits and congresses. The ambiguity and novelty of the idea was criticized by some countries, which led to the publication of two more significant works within the framework of the United Nations Development Program: "Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization" (Desai, 2003) and "New Public Finance: Responding to Global Challenges" (Kaul & Conceicao, 2006), in which the concept was concretized and proposals for the development of the program were elaborated. In particular, new global issues requiring supranational solutions were identified, such as global financial stability and market efficiency, the risk of global climate change, biodiversity conservation, the fight against renewable and emerging infectious diseases, food safety, cybercrime and e-commerce, drug control and international terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and others.…”

Section: The Concept Of Global Public Goods: New Groundsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The concept of global public goods in contemporary international relations between Russia and China

Кононкова

Bulgakova

Кузнецова

et al. 2021

BJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research concentrates on the development of the concept of global public goods in Russia and China, while new economic grounds are emerging, including a shift to digital economy and the COVID-19 pandemic. This concept is analyzed with a special emphasis on joint Russian-Chinese projects. The analysis is supplemented by a classification based on the financing of global public goods. The findings of our research show that the vast majority of global public goods are financed by governments, even though such global threats as pandemics require donations, as well as further actions by all possible investors. According to the results, with the rapid development of digitalization, most initiatives are aimed at encouraging the spread of digital technologies. The findings of the research suggest implications for figuring out who may have a special interest in the financial aspect of the concept of global public goods.

show abstract

Section: The Concept Of Global Public Goods: New Groundsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The concept of global public goods in contemporary international relations between Russia and China

Кононкова

Bulgakova

Кузнецова

et al. 2021

BJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the most influential recent contributions to this debate has been articulated by Inge Kaul and associates (Kaul et al, 1999(Kaul et al, , 2003Kaul and Conceição, 2006). The point of departure is to revisit the classic formulation of public goods, critiquing this as inadequate, since society has become highly capable of modifying the (non)rivalrous aspects and (non)excludability of a good's benefits, for instance using technology.…”

Section: Club Versus Global Goods and Models Of Multilateralismmentioning

confidence: 99%

From ‘Club of the Rich’ to ‘Globalisation à la carte’? Evaluating Reform at the OECD

Clifton¹,

Fuentes²

2011

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recognising the declining weight of its members in the world economy, the OECD, formerly known as a ‘club of rich, industrialised nations’, is undergoing unprecedented organisational reform, including a more inclusive membership logic, engagement with new global players, and outreach to developing countries, all with a view to guaranteeing its continued relevance as a central actor in the task of global policy provision. Using the concepts of global public goods, clubs and models of multilateralism, this article critically evaluates the successes and limits of the OECD’s reform, arguing that it is adopting a restrictive approach to expansion – globalisation ‘à la carte’. Meaningful reform towards greater inclusion is apparent in the way research on nonmembers has been mainstreamed, and in its increased work both with emerging powers and with developing countries. Limits to reform are found in institutional rigidities including its overrepresentation of Europe and underrepresentation of Asia and other continents, reflected through staff profiles and membership. These biases may in turn reduce its attractiveness as a global forum to new players, particularly China. Policy Implications Shifts in the world economy towards the east and the south pose significant challenges to international organisations, which must ensure that processes of global governance fully involve key actors, in the quest for functional and legitimate global policy. While many international organisations have near universal membership, the OECD was established as a club. However, it now recognises that it needs to engage key nonmembers in order to help govern the world economy. The OECD is casting off its ‘club’ inheritance, particularly in terms of the services it provides, which are increasingly oriented to serving a broader community beyond members. But future reform will be constrained until organisational change under way at the OECD manages to overcome its ‘club’ inheritance, and convinces emerging powers – particularly the BRICS – of the benefits of working with them.

show abstract

“…So it has become a main topic in the political debate and in economic research how to improve the supply of "global public goods", the most prominent of which by now is climate protection (see, e.g., Kaul, Grunberg and Stern, 1999, Kaul et al, 2003, Sandler, 2004, Nordhaus, 2005, Sandmo, 2006, and Kaul and Conceição, 2006. It is a standard result in the theory of public goods that provision of a public good remains inefficiently low when agents (or in the case of an international public good countries) act non-cooperatively (see, e.g., Sandler, 1992, or Cornes and Sandler, 1996, for a detailed explanation of this standard result).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equal sacrifice and fair burden-sharing in a public goods economy

Buchholz

Peters

2008

Int Tax Public Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applying a willingness-to-pay approach known from contingent valuation in environmental economics we first develop an ordinally based specific measure for the size of individual sacrifice that is connected with an agent's contribution to a public good. We then construct a selection mechanism that picks the unique efficient solution among all allocations that have an equal sacrifice as defined in this way. We show that the solution thus obtained not only corresponds to the egalitarian equivalent public good allocation devised by Moulin but also that it has much in common with the much older Lindahl equilibrium. Moreover, the equal sacrifice solutions as characterized in this paper fulfil the ability-to-pay as well as the benefit principle. JEL Classification Number: H41

show abstract

The New Public Finance

Cited by 64 publications

References 204 publications

The concept of global public goods in contemporary international relations between Russia and China

The concept of global public goods in contemporary international relations between Russia and China

From ‘Club of the Rich’ to ‘Globalisation à la carte’? Evaluating Reform at the OECD

Equal sacrifice and fair burden-sharing in a public goods economy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About