Which Public Goods are Endangered?: How Evolving Communication Technologies Affect The Logic of Collective Action
dc.contributor.author | Lupia, Arthur | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Sin, Gisela | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2006-09-11T16:08:28Z | |
dc.date.available | 2006-09-11T16:08:28Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2003-12 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Lupia, Arthur; Sin, Gisela; (2003). "Which Public Goods are Endangered?: How Evolving Communication Technologies Affect The Logic of Collective Action." Public Choice 117 (3-4): 315-331. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/45506> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1573-7101 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0048-5829 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/45506 | |
dc.description.abstract | The theory in Mancur Olson's The Logicof Collective Action is built fromhistorically uncontroversial assumptionsabout interpersonal communication. Today,evolving technologies are changingcommunication dynamics in ways thatinvalidate some of these onceuncontroversial assumptions. How dothese changes affect Olson's thesis? Usingresearch tools that were not available toOlson, we differentiate collective actionsthat new communication technologies helpfrom the endeavors that they hurt. In theprocess, we refine some of Olson'sbest-known ideas. For example, we find thatevolving communication technologieseliminate many of the organizationaladvantages that Olson attributed to smallgroups. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 98917 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 3115 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | |
dc.publisher | Kluwer Academic Publishers; Springer Science+Business Media | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Political Science | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Social Sciences, General | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Public Finance & Economics | en_US |
dc.title | Which Public Goods are Endangered?: How Evolving Communication Technologies Affect The Logic of Collective Action | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Economics | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Business | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Department of Political Science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-1045, U.S.A. | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Department of Political Science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-1045, U.S.A. | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampus | Ann Arbor | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/45506/1/11127_2004_Article_5142797.pdf | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:PUCH.0000003735.07840.c7 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Public Choice | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.