Institutions and Sustainable Development
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The escape from divine revelation since the Enlightenment has been paralleled by a rise in the worship of science and technology, promoted by the material success of the Industrial Revolution, which in some countries bred for a short time central economic planning, which eventually withered away. As the flight gathered speed, there has been a revival of the ancient cult of species worship, in which the unintended consequences of materialism finally cause an awareness that the existence of the human species is under threat. Sustainable development is in this light the contemporary political and eschatological question for everyone. Central to the question of sustainable development is not only science and technology which, by itself, produces only summary statements on how physical entities are related. It does not provide methods of how human inputs are to be used in conjunction with these physical entities by appropriately applying the results of technology in generating outputs. It also does not address issues on how the outputs of the combination of technology and human resources ought to be valued. Last, it does not address how existing technologies can be combined, further modified, and developed into an institutional environment for continuous experiments and improvements. (Lai and Lome, 2003, vii) Hundreds of papers and books have been written on sustainable development and planning, but few have focused on the significance of institutions. The papers collected in this special issue reflect on the question of institutions in the promotion of planning for sustainable development from a number of value positions. While the theoretical perspectives and emphasis of the authors are different, there are many similarities. First, they share the view that the question of institutional arrangements cannot be ignored in a meaningful inquiry into sustainability. second, real life examples are used to demonstrate the arguments involved. These examples are those from such countries as the UK, Demark, USA, Canada, and Israel. Third, the concept of transaction costs underpins four out of the five papers, reflecting a growing influence of neo-institutional economics informed by the ideas of Ronald H. Coase in planning theory. Fourth, there is no dispute that consensus and mutual agreement is significant in shaping solutions that are sustainable. To the faithful, this consideration is but one step next to the concept of a covenant between God and man forgotten in contemporary articulation of private property. With reference to three examples, namely military base closures in the US Congress, Amsterdam metropolitan-regional governance, and the national statutory planning system in Israel, the work of Alexander seeks to offer a typology of institutional design normatively understood as being involved in all intentional institutional transformations, both innovative and evolutionary. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,037 |
| Communication savante | 0,016 | 0,012 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,011 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,016 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».