Differences between revisions 15 and 18 (spanning 3 versions)
Revision 15 as of 2026-02-10 01:13:53
Size: 3532
Comment: Link
Revision 18 as of 2026-02-10 01:54:46
Size: 3286
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 34: Line 32:
 * [[WhatTheSentencingCommissionOughtToBeDoing|What the Sentencing Commission Ought to Be Doing: Reducing Mass Incarceration]], Lynn Adelman, 2013  * [[DidHamiltonJeffersonAndMadisonCauseTheUSGovernmentShutdown|Did Hamilton, Jefferson, and Madison “Cause” the U.S. Government Shutdown? The Institutional Path from an Eighteenth Century Republic to a Twenty-first Century Democracy]], John H. Aldrich, 2015

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)