Filtern
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (11) (entfernen)
Erscheinungsjahr
- 2011 (11) (entfernen)
Dokumenttyp
- Teil eines Buches (Kapitel) (6)
- Arbeitspapier (3)
- Dissertation (2)
Sprache
- Englisch (11) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Bayesian Network (1)
- Bayesianisches Netzwerk (1)
- Bayesianism (1)
- Bayesianismus (1)
- Cars (1)
- EU (1)
- Energie (1)
- Gas (1)
- Greenhouse Gas Emissions (1)
- Kooperation (1)
Institut
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (11) (entfernen)
Public debate about energy relations between the EU and Russia is distorted. These distortions present considerable obstacles to the development of true partnership. At the core of the conflict is a struggle for resource rents between energy producing, energy consuming and transit countries. Supposed secondary aspects, however, are also of great importance. They comprise of geopolitics, market access, economic development and state sovereignty. The European Union, having engaged in energy market liberalisation, faces a widening gap between declining domestic resources and continuously growing energy demand. Diverse interests inside the EU prevent the definition of a coherent and respected energy policy. Russia, for its part, is no longer willing to subsidise its neighbouring economies by cheap energy exports. The Russian government engages in assertive policies pursuing Russian interests. In so far, it opts for a different globalisation approach, refusing the role of mere energy exporter. In view of the intensifying struggle for global resources, Russia, with its large energy potential, appears to be a very favourable option for European energy supplies, if not the best one. However, several outcomes of the strategic game between the two partners can be imagined. Engaging in non-cooperative strategies will in the end leave all stakeholders worse-off. The European Union should therefore concentrate on securing its partnership with Russia instead of damaging it. Stable cooperation would need the acceptance that the partner may pursue his own goals, which might be different from one’s own interests. The question is, how can a sustainable compromise be found? This thesis finds that a mix of continued dialogue, a tit for tat approach bolstered by an international institutional framework and increased integration efforts appears as a preferable solution.
This paper develops the incentives to collude in a model with spatially separated markets and quantity setting firms. We find that increases in transportation costs stabilize the collusive agreement. We also show that, the higher the demand in both markets the less likely will collusion be sustained. Gross and Holahan (2003) use a similar model with price setting firms, we compare their results with ours to analyze the impact of the mode of competition on sustainability of collusion. Further we analyze the impact of collusion on social welfare and find that collusion may be welfare enhancing.
This volume contains the articles and papers which predominately have been published in international journals or edited volumes in the period from 1979 to 2009. The single articles reflect the main research areas of the editor and his co-authors who were engaged at the Kiel Institute of World Economics, the Johannes-Kepler-University Linz/Austria, the Justus- Liebig-University Giessen, the University of Potsdam, and the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin).
This volume contains the articles and papers which predominately have been published in international journals or edited volumes in the period from 1979 to 2009. The single articles reflect the main research areas of the editor and his co-authors who were engaged at the Kiel Institute of World Economics, the Johannes-Kepler-University Linz/Austria, the Justus- Liebig-University Giessen, the University of Potsdam, and the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin).
This volume contains the articles and papers which predominately have been published in international journals or edited volumes in the period from 1979 to 2009. The single articles reflect the main research areas of the editor and his co-authors who were engaged at the Kiel Institute of World Economics, the Johannes-Kepler-University Linz/Austria, the Justus- Liebig-University Giessen, the University of Potsdam, and the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin).
This volume contains the articles and papers which predominately have been published in international journals or edited volumes in the period from 1979 to 2009. The single articles reflect the main research areas of the editor and his co-authors who were engaged at the Kiel Institute of World Economics, the Johannes-Kepler-University Linz/Austria, the Justus- Liebig-University Giessen, the University of Potsdam, and the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin).
This volume contains the articles and papers which predominately have been published in international journals or edited volumes in the period from 1979 to 2009. The single articles reflect the main research areas of the editor and his co-authors who were engaged at the Kiel Institute of World Economics, the Johannes-Kepler-University Linz/Austria, the Justus- Liebig-University Giessen, the University of Potsdam, and the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin).
This volume contains the articles and papers which predominately have been published in international journals or edited volumes in the period from 1979 to 2009. The single articles reflect the main research areas of the editor and his co-authors who were engaged at the Kiel Institute of World Economics, the Johannes-Kepler-University Linz/Austria, the Justus- Liebig-University Giessen, the University of Potsdam, and the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin).
Looking at smoking-behavior it can be shown that there are differences concerning the time-preference-rate. Therefore this has an effect on the optimal schooling decision in the way that we appear a lower average human capital level for smokers. According to a higher time-preference-rate additionally we suppose a higher return to education for smokers who go further on education. With our empirical findings we can confirm the presumptions. We use interactions-terms to regress the average rate of return with IV. Therefore we obtain that smokers have a significantly higher average return to education than non-smokers.