Probabilistic Political Viability: A Methodology for Predictive Political Economy
AbstractCurrently available political economic tools are not very useful for predicting the outcomes of real-world policy problems. Researchers have limited information on which to assign parameters to the mappings from policies to outcomes to utilities or to represent the political process adequately. We present a method for evaluating the viability of political alternatives in complex settings and apply it to an ongoing California water policy debate. Certain options would be "robustly politically viable" if stakeholder groups trusted that they would be implemented as negotiated. Once we incorporate institutional mistrust into the model, none of the alternatives are robustly politically viable.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Smith College, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 2012-01.
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.smith.edu/econ/
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- P48 - Economic Systems - - Other Economic Systems - - - Political Economy; Legal Institutions; Property Rights; Natural Resources; Energy; Environment; Regional Studies
- Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
- Q34 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Natural Resources and Domestic and International Conflicts
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Robert J. Lempert & David G. Groves & Steven W. Popper & Steve C. Bankes, 2006. "A General, Analytic Method for Generating Robust Strategies and Narrative Scenarios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(4), pages 514-528, April.
- Thomas J. Sargent & LarsPeter Hansen, 2001. "Robust Control and Model Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 60-66, May.
- Jay Lund & Ellen Hanak & William Fleenor & William Bennett & Richard Howitt & Jeffrey Mount & Peter Moyle, 2008. "Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta," PPIC Research Reports, Public Policy Institute of California, number deltab.
- Ellen Hanak, 2007. "Envisioning Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta," PPIC Research Reports, Public Policy Institute of California, number deltaa.
- Shaw, W. Douglass & Woodward, Richard T., 2008. "Why environmental and resource economists should care about non-expected utility models," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 66-89, January.
- Sinn, Hans-Werner, 1980.
"A Rehabilitation of the Principle of Insufficient Reason,"
Munich Reprints in Economics
19914, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Sinn, Hans-Werner, 1980. "A Rehabilitation of the Principle of Insufficient Reason," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 94(3), pages 493-506, May.
- I. Gilboa & A. W. Postlewaite & D. Schmeidler., 2009.
"Probability and Uncertainty in Economic Modeling,"
N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 10.
- Richard T. Woodward & W. Douglass Shaw, 2008. "Allocating Resources in an Uncertain World: Water Management and Endangered Species," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(3), pages 593-605.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Elizabeth Savoca).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.