IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/jku/econwp/2000_03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Quo vadimus. Grundgedanken zum Verhältnis von Wirtschaft, Gesellschaft und Staat

Author

Abstract

Quantitative Wohlstandsmaße (z.B. das BIP) sind als wirtschaftspolitische Zielgrößen zu kritisieren. Die qualitativen Komponenten des umfassenderen, volkswirtschaftlich relevanten Begriffs gesellschaftliche Wohlfahrt werden dabei missachtet: Öffentliche Güter wie Verteilungsgerechtigkeit, Vollbeschäftigung, Arbeitsplatz- und Umweltqualität werden jedoch vom Markt kaum produziert und würden eine entsprechende Wirtschaftspolitik erfordern. Doch auf Grund ihrer Analysemethodik und politischen Interessenlage nimmt die konservativ-liberale Wirtschaftswissenschaft und -politik auf solche wohlfahrtspolitischen Aspekte keine Rücksicht. Gerade in Zeiten der Entsolidarisierung propagiert sie den egoistischen, aber nicht ungefährlichen Wettbewerb auf globaler Ebene. Gleichzeitig ist ein Trend weg von wirtschaftspartnerlnnenschaftlicher Zusammenarbeit hin zur Shareholder-Mentalität festzustellen. Schließlich wird der Staat als Firma angesehen - eine Sicht, die, wie die anderen aufgezeigten Tendenzen, wirtschaftspolitische Verantwortlichkeit und gesellschaftliche Wohlfahrt aushöhlt.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Rainer Bartel, 2000. "Quo vadimus. Grundgedanken zum Verhältnis von Wirtschaft, Gesellschaft und Staat," Economics working papers 2000-03, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    • Handle: RePEc:jku:econwp:2000_03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.jku.at/papers/2000/wp0003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krugman, Paul R, 1996. "Making Sense of the Competitiveness Debate," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 12(3), pages 17-25, Autumn.
    2. repec:bla:ecorec:v:55:y:1979:i:149:p:95-107 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Rainer Bartel, 1991. "Wirtschaftspolitik in der Marktwirtschaft," Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft - WuG, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik, vol. 17(2), pages 229-249.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Friedrich Schneider & Alexander F. Wagner, 2003. "Tradeable permits - Ten key design issues," Economics working papers 2003-04, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    2. Friedrich Schneider & Alexander F. Wagner & Mathias Dufour, 2003. "Satisfaction not guaranteed-Institutions and satisfaction with democracy in Western Europe," Economics working papers 2003-03, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    3. Friedrich Schneider & Kausik Chaudhuri & Sumana Chatterjee, 2003. "The Size and Development of the Indian Shadow Economy and a Comparison with other 18 Asian Countries: An Empirical Investigation," Economics working papers 2003-02, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sung Li & Long Zhao, 2015. "The competitiveness and development strategies of provinces in China: a data envelopment analysis approach," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 293-307, December.
    2. Julian Bundo & Mirdaim Axhami, 2020. "An Exploratory Study of Place Marketing Factors in Albanian Football," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 6, ejes_v6_i.
    3. Giammario Impullitti, 2007. "International Schumpeterian Competition and Optimal R&D subsidies," Economics Working Papers ECO2007/55, European University Institute.
    4. Alan Collins, 2007. "Making Truly Competitive Cities – On The Appropriate Role For Local Government," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 75-80, September.
    5. Massimo Aria & Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta & Ugo Marani, 2019. "Similarities and Differences in Competitiveness Among European NUTS2 Regions: An Empirical Analysis Based on 2010–2013 Data," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 431-450, February.
    6. Peter Mayerhofer & Oliver Fritz & Dieter Pennerstorfer, 2010. "Dritter Bericht zur internationalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Wiens," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 42430, April.
    7. Marta Nečadová, 2015. "Selected Approaches to Measurement of National Competitiveness and the Results of Visegrad Group in Years 2007-2014 [Vybrané přístupy k měření národní konkurenceschopnosti: výsledky zemí Visegrádsk," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(2), pages 22-39.
    8. Argentino Pessoa, 2013. "Competitiveness, Clusters And Policy At The Regional Level: Rhetoric Vs. Practice In Designing Policy For Depressed Regions," Regional Science Inquiry, Hellenic Association of Regional Scientists, vol. 0(1), pages 101-116, June.
    9. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    10. Dumont, Michel, 2005. "Do we have to look at China to tell our fortune?," MPRA Paper 102433, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Mark Thissen & Frank van Oort & Philip McCann & Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Trond Husby, 2020. "The Implications of Brexit for UK and EU Regional Competitiveness," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 96(5), pages 397-421, October.
    12. Roberto Camagni, 2002. "On the Concept of Territorial Competitiveness: Sound or Misleading?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 39(13), pages 2395-2411, December.
    13. William F. Lever & Ivan Turok, 1999. "Competitive Cities: Introduction to the Review," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(5-6), pages 791-793, May.
    14. Marinov, Eduard, 2022. "Regional Competitiveness of Bulgarian Regions and their Place in the European Union," MPRA Paper 113679, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Hossein Komasi & Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Olegas Prentkovskis & Paulius Skačkauskas, 2022. "Urban Competitiveness: Identification and Analysis of Sustainable Key Drivers (A Case Study in Iran)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-22, June.
    16. David J. Brooksbank & David G. Pickernell, 1999. "Regional Competitiveness Indicators," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 13(4), pages 310-326, February.
    17. Ana Rita Marques & Cátia Silva, 2018. "Assessing the Competitiveness of the Portuguese Chemical Sector," GEE Papers 0110, Gabinete de Estratégia e Estudos, Ministério da Economia, revised Sep 2018.
    18. Janno Reiljan & Maria Hinrikus & Anneli Ivanov, 2000. "Key Issues In Defining And Analysing The Competitiveness Of A Country," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper Series 1, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
    19. Prof. Carmen Corduneanu Ph. D & Lect. Rodica Gabriela Blidisel Ph. D, 2010. "The Impact Of Cohesion Policy And Of Member States Effort On Competitiveness," Annals of University of Craiova - Economic Sciences Series, University of Craiova, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 2(38), pages 1-12, May.
    20. Alemka Šegota & Marko Tomljanoviæ & Ivona Huðek, 2017. "Contemporary approaches to measuring competitiveness – the case of EU member states," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 35(1), pages 123-150.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jku:econwp:2000_03. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: René Böheim (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vlinzat.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.