Abstract
Mainstream economics views the workplace from the perspective of
property rights, maximum efficiency, and profit maximization. Economic
resources, including human beings, are represented as instrumentalities.
Social economics affirms the problem of unmet human material need and
the inadequacy of the “invisible hand” solution but does not provide a
single paradigm as to how the workplace is reconstructed to meet that
need. The key to workplace reconstruction is to shift attention from
property rights and personal rights to human material need by
recognizing that rights derive from need and that rights are means to
the end of meeting need. Describes the seven workplace regimes in which
human material need is more salient than property rights, personal
rights or organizational types such as sole proprietorship or
corporation, and the characteristics of the industrial commons, drawing
on Ronald Oakerson′s framework for analysing the natural resource
commons.
Subject
General Social Sciences,Economics and Econometrics
Reference10 articles.
1. Adams, W. (1982), “Economic Theory and Economic Policy”, Review of
Social Economy, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 1‐12.
2. Bloch, M. (1966), “The Rise of Dependent Cultivation and Seignorial
Institutions”, in Postan, M.M. (Ed.), Cambridge Economic History of
Europe, Volume I, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
3. Bromley, D. (1992), “The Commons, Property, and Common‐Property
Regimes”, in Bromley, D. W. (Ed.), Making the Commons Work, ICS
Press, San Francisco, CA.
4. Bruyn, S. (1984), “The Community Self‐study: Worker Self‐management
versus the New Class”, Review of Social Economy, Vol. 42 No.
3, pp. 388‐412.
5. Bruyn, S. (1991), A Future for the American Economy: The Social
Market, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CT.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. On the hospital as commons;International Journal of Social Economics;1995-07-01