| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
034532
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Methuen and co. ltd., 1968.
|
| Description |
387p.Hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 001055 | 910.132/FIS 001055 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
159585
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
145085
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Different beliefs about how to achieve shared goals are common in political organizations such as government agencies, campaigns, and NGOs. However, the consequences of such conflicts have not yet been explored. We develop a formal model in which a principal and an agent disagree about the right policy for achieving their shared goals. Disagreement creates a motivational problem, but we show how both observing policy outcomes and experimenting with policies can ameliorate it. We also show that the principal often defers to the agent in order to motivate him, thereby generating more informative policy outcomes and building future consensus. Most surprisingly, she sometimes allows the agent to implement his desired policy even when she is sure it is wrong, to persuade him through failure that he is mistaken. Using the model, we generate empirical implications about performance measurement and Presidential appointments in U.S. federal agencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
192282
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In Turkey, land reform was subject to fierce debates among different political groups throughout the 1960s. Land occupations and small peasant demonstrations were seen as new forms of struggle to voice demands for land reform. This article explores the gender and class specific effects of global post-war American expansion policies on agrarian change and peasant struggle in the form of land occupations in rural Turkey. Focusing on the Aegean villages of Golluce and Atalan in the late 1960s, it argues that different political organizations imagined villages as laboratories to test their visions of land reform and the occupiers as a homogeneous class regardless of gender-specific claims. In doing so, it highlights the characteristics of rural class struggles and the politics of land reform with reference to social class and gender in Turkey in this period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|