Differences between revisions 13 and 15 (spanning 2 versions)
Revision 13 as of 2026-02-09 03:38:40
Size: 2766
Comment: Link
Revision 15 as of 2026-02-10 01:13:53
Size: 3532
Comment: Link
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 31: Line 31:
 * [[MarvinFrankelsMistakesAndTheNeedToRethinkFederalSentencing|Marvin Frankel's Mistakes and the Need to Rethink Federal Sentencing]], Lynn Adelman and Jon Deitrich, 2008
 * [[ImprovingTheGuidelinesThroughCriticalEvaluation|Improving the Guidelines Through Critical Evaluation: An Important New Role for District Courts]], Lynn Adelman and Jon Deitrich, 2009
Line 32: Line 34:
 * [[WhatTheSentencingCommissionOughtToBeDoing|What the Sentencing Commission Ought to Be Doing: Reducing Mass Incarceration]], Lynn Adelman, 2013
Line 35: Line 38:
 * [[AgencyInstitutionsAndWelfareChauvinism|Agency, institutions, and welfare chauvinism: Tracing the exclusion of European Union migrant citizens from social assistance in Germany]]; Dominic Afscharian, Cecilia Bruzelius, and Martin Seeleib-Kaiser; 2024

Institutional Design

Institutional design is a field that studies the game theoretic and comparative outcomes of structures.


Description

Institutional design is the study of how actors behave within an institution (or otherwise-defined rule set) and of how to shape an institution to yield certain behavior.

It implicitly assumes instrumentalism in that the form of institutions derives from utility rather than philosophy. Beyond this, it generally builds from either public choice or social choice methods for measuring and comparing utility.

For studies of democratic (little d, one-person-one-vote) voting rules, the theory of rational choice voting is the appropriate specialization.

Legislators are generally characterized by some combination of credit claiming and blame avoiding.


Reading Notes


CategoryRicottone

PoliticalScience/InstitutionalDesign (last edited 2026-03-09 17:57:44 by DominicRicottone)