Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (13)
Year of publication
- 2004 (13) (remove)
Document Type
- Working Paper (13) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (13)
Institute
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (13)
- Extern (2)
Social segregation in cities takes place where different household groups exist and when, according to Schelling, their location choice either minimizes the number of differing households in their neighborhood or maximizes their own group. In this contribution an evolutionary simulation based on a monocentric city model with externalities among households is used to discuss the spatial segregation patterns of four groups. The resulting complex spatial patterns can be shown as graphic animations. They can be applied as initial situation for the analysis of the effects a rent control has on segregation.
Inhalt 1 Einführung und Grundlagen 1.1 Problemstellung und Vorgehensweise 1.2 Ordnungsökonomische Systematisierung 1.3 „Neue“ Besonderheitenlehre für Netzindustrien 2 Ansatzpunkte zur Liberalisierung in Netzindustrien 2.1 Liberalisierung durch Privatisierung 2.1.1 Interdependenz von Privatisierung und Marktöffnung 2.1.2 Privatisierungsstufen 2.2 Liberalisierung durch Deregulierung und Re-Regulierung 2.2.1 Abgrenzung des relevanten Marktes: Netzinfrastruktur versus Netzdienstleistungen 2.2.2 Lokalisierung und Kontrolle von Marktmacht bei Netzinfrastruktur 2.3 Modelle zur Gewährleistung eines diskriminierungsfreien Netzzugangs 2.3.1 Verhandelter Netzzugang mit Missbrauchsaufsicht im Sinne der Essential-Facilities-Doktrin 2.3.2 Staatliche Regulierung des Netzzugangs 2.4 Theorie der vertikalen (Des-)Integration 2.4.1 Allokativ-statische, wohlfahrtsökonomische Analyse vertikaler Integration 2.4.2 Institutionenökonomische Analyse vertikaler Integration 2.4.3 Dynamische, wettbewerbsökonomische Analyse vertikaler Integration 2.4.4 Konsequenz: Vertikale Desintegration 3 Institutionelle Ausgestaltung der Wettbewerbsaufsicht 3.1 Systematisierung der Träger und Kompetenzabgrenzung 3.2 Kriterien für eine effiziente Wettbewerbsaufsicht 4 Schlussfolgerungen und intersektoraler Vergleich des Liberalisierungsprozessesin Netzindustrien
In diesem Beitrag wird das optimale Angebot für einen Wohnungsmarkt bestimmt. Die Nachfrage wird dafür aus einem offenen Modell der monozentrischen Stadt hergeleitet. Weiterhin wird davon ausgegangen, dass Wohnungen aufgrund der verschiedenen Standorte und aufgrund weiterer diskreter Wohnungsmerkmale heterogen sind. Der Wohnungsanbieter an einem Standort wird daher als Mehrproduktmonopolist aufgefasst. Als gewinnmaximale Angebotsstruktur zeigt sich, dass unter bestimmten Bedingungen Wohnungen gleichen Typs an verschiedenen Standorten gleich groß sind. Außerdem werden an den jeweiligen Standorten mehrere Wohnungstypen angeboten. Diese beiden Resultate stehen im deutlichen Gegensatz zu Modellen der Neuen Stadtökonomie, wonach an den Standorten jeweils nur ein Wohnungstyp angeboten wird, dessen Größe zudem über die verschiedenen Standorte variiert.
Table of contens 1 Introduction 2 The concept of sustainability 2.1 Ecological sustainability 2.2 Social sustainability 2.3 Economic sustainability 2.4 The sustainability strategy of the german government 3 Effects of energy use on the enviromment 4 Requirements of the SSGG for energy policy 4.1 Ecological implications of thr SSGG 4.2 Social and economic requirements of the SSGG 5 The German Renewable Energies Act 5.1 Objectives 5.2 Design and mechanisms 5.3 Fees-in tariffs 6 Does the EEG meet the sustainability requirements of the SSGG? 6.1 Management rules 6.2 Social sustainability 6.3 Economic sustainability 6.4 Development tendencis 7 Possible amendments for more sustainability 7.1 Changing the promotional system 7.2 A European regulation
Table of contents 1 Introduction 2 Ecological regulation and cost effectiveness 2.1 Climate policy 2.2 Promotion of renewable energies 3 Ecological regulation and security of supply 3.1 Climate policy 3.2 Promotion of renewable energies 4 The German Renewable Energies Act (EEG) 4.1 Objectives 4.2 Design and mechanisms 5 The European emissions trading system (EETS) 5.1 Objectives 5.2 Framework 6 The EEG and the EETS: trade off between ecological objectivesand cost effectiveness, innovation and security of supply? 6.1 EEG 6.2 EETS 6.3 Comparison between the approaches of the EEG and the EETS 7 Conclusions and outlook
Economy vs. history
(2004)
The aim of this study is to examine in which cases economic forces or historical singularities prevail in the determination of the long-run distribution of firms. We develop a relatively general model of heterogenous firms' location choice in discrete space. The main force towards an agglomerated structure is the reduction of transaction costs for consumers if firms are located closely, whilst competition and transport costs work towards a more disperse structure. We then assess the importance of the initial conditions by simulating and comparing the resulting distribution of firms for identical economic parameters but varying initial settings. If the equilibrium distributions of firms are similar we conclude that economic forces have prevailed, while differences in the resulting distributions indicate that 'history' is more important. The (dis)similarity of distributions of firms is calculated by means of a measure, which exhibits a number of desirable features.
An exhaustive and disjoint decomposition of social choice situations is derived in a general set theoretical framework using the new tools of the Lifted Pareto relation on the power set of social states representing a pre-choice comparison of choice option sets. The main result is the classification of social choice situations which include three types of social choice problems. First, we usually observe the common incompleteness of the Pareto relation. Second, a kind of non-compactness problem of a choice set of social states can be generated. Finally, both can be combined. The first problem root can be regarded as natural everyday dilemma of social choice theory whereas the second may probably be much more due to modeling technique implications. The distinction is enabled at a very general set theoretical level. Hence, the derived classification of social choice situations is applicable on almost every relevant economic model.
Inhalt 1 Politikzyklus als konzeptioneller Bezugsrahmen 2 Ökonomische Problematik von Netzindustrien und Liberalisierungsgründe 3 Privatisierung und Marktöffnung als wirtschaftspolitische Aufgaben 4 Politisierung von Liberalisierungsinteressen 4.1 Politiker als Intermediäre 4.2 Zielkonflikte und Interdependenzen mit anderen Politikfeldern 5 Rent-Seeking-Aktivitäten in Netzindustrien 5.1 Der „Markt“ für Rent-Seeking-Aktivitäten 5.2 Der „Wettbewerb“ von Interessengruppen 6 Administrative Umsetzung und Evaluierung von Liberalisierungen 7 Fazit
Optimal spatial patterns of two, three and four segregated household groups in a monocentric city
(2004)
Usually, in monocentric city models the spatial patterns of segregated household groups are assumed to be ring-shaped, while early in the 1930ies Hoyt showed that wedge-shaped areas empirically predominate. This contribution presents a monocentric city model with different household groups generating positive externalities within the groups. At first, border length is founded as a criterion of optimality. Secondly, it is shown that mixed patterns of concentric and wedge-shaped areas represent multiple equilibria if more than two groups of households are being considered. The welfare optimal segregated pattern depends on the relative purchasing power of different household groups.
Revisiting public investment
(2004)
The consumption equivalence method is the theoretical basis of public cost-benefit analysis. Consumption equivalence public capital prices are explicitly introduces in order to sufficiently care for the opportunity cost of public expenditure. This can solve the dispute about the social rate of discount within public cost-benefit analysis witch was generated on a criterion looking similar to the capital value formula, known as Lind’s approach. The social rate of discount is liberated from opportunity costs considerations and the discounting away of the effects for future welfare vanishes. The corresponding question whether one should accept a positive value of the pure rate of social time preference is an old issue. Its current state between the prescriptive and descriptive view can also be interpreted as a consequence of the oversimplification of standard cost– benefit analysis. But apart from an economic self-process the pure rate of social time preference is also defined as a business-as-usual value of social distance discounting. Hence, a political choice has to be made about this rate which is free in principal.