Suchergebnisse

Municipal ownership, N. D. Baker: Municipal ownershipthe testimony of foreign experience, F. C. Howe: Pasadena's municipal light and power plant, C. W. Koiner; South Norwalk's municipal electric works, A. E. Winchester; Hydro-electric system in Toronto, H. C. Hocken; Some limitations and objections to municipal ownership, C. M. Rosecrantz; Open discussion.

Current ownership dogma has had pernicious consequences for fledgling democracies from Bosnia to Iraq to East Timor. Ownership advocates insist that democracy will only take root when local stakeholders (not outside actors) make and implement decisions. But ritualistic application of this theory imposes severe costs. Ownership doctrine, this paper sets out, has three core errors. First, it ignores the fact that some societies are unable to take ownership of their affairs, hence the need for dispassionate outsiders to occasionally assert their authority. Second, ownership doctrine asserts that meddlesome outsiders are the bane of young democracies or transition countries. Yet, ample evidence exists to challenge this view. Third, ownership doctrine substitutes ownership per Se, rather than responsible behavior by local institutions and actors, as the over-arching goal. Encouraging disputants (or even non-disputants) to take the leading role in managing their country and their relationships is healthy, permitting them to do so in a way that aggravates tensions and subjects populations to risk is irresponsible. This paper argues for striking the balance between inculcating dependency by assuming too much authority and permitting chaos to reign by indulging prematurely in local ownership. Adapted from the source document.

Two premises about ownership that contrast with prevailing views are developed from ordinary usage: (1) ownership can be valuable in its own right apart from the value of the object owned, & (2) ownership does not just label particular rights but more practically names a relationship to an object that forms the basis for claiming that ownership rights should exist. The owner's relation to object is an ontological one that is only partially & contingently related to ownership rights. This relationship resembles the relationship of a person to his/her body & is associated with the use of the personal pronouns I & me & the possessive pronouns my & mine. Concepts of value, pride, autonomy, status, & expressivity that enter into ownership & concepts of reference, allusion, & identity are discussed. Ownership provides surplus value beyond the value of the object itself because ownership value is one's own value extended to the object & implied in the use of the variant I(my) applied to the owned object. M. Pflum