پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,246 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,922 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,715,888 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 90,481,464 |
مداخله های دولت در بازار هنرهای نمایشی ایران: تجربیات و دلالت‌های سیاستی | ||
| سیاستگذاری عمومی | ||
| مقاله 1، دوره 3، شماره 3، آذر 1396، صفحه 9-33 اصل مقاله (440.3 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/ppolicy.2017.64169 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| زهرا خوشبوئی1؛ محمد حسینی2؛ محمد علی ابوترابی* 3 | ||
| 1دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد اقتصاد هنر دانشگاه امام رضا (ع) | ||
| 2استادیار اقتصاد پژوهشگاه علوم و فرهنگ اسلامی | ||
| 3دکتری علوم اقتصادی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد | ||
| چکیده | ||
| مداخله های دولت می‌تواند نقش بسیار با اهمیتی در روند تولیدات بازار داشته باشد. از آن‌جایی که دیدگاه‌های متفاوتی نسبت به مداخله های دولت در بازار وجود دارد، این مقاله با استفاده از روش تحلیل آمارهای توصیفی به بررسی انواع این دیدگاه‌ها و بررسی وضعیت کنونی مداخله های دولت در بازار تولید تئاتر ایران می‌پردازد. به منظور تبیین آثار مداخله های دولت در بازار تئاتر از دادههای مربوط به تولیدات تئاتر در طی سالهای 1389 تا 1394 استفاده شده است. نتایج این مقاله گویای آن است، دولت از طریق توسعه زیرساختارها، مقرراتزایی، انحرافات قیمتی و برخی سیاستهای صلاحدیدی تلاش نموده تا بازار را کنترل نماید، اما این مداخله ها اثربخشی مورد انتظار را نداشته است. همچنین این مقاله، دلالت‌های سیاستی تجربه ایران از مداخله دولت در بازار تولید تئاتر را مورد بحث قرار می‌دهد. این دلالتها پیشنهاد می‌کند که دولت، سیاستهای مداخله گرایانه خود را به گونهای تنظیم کند که به توسعه بیشتر زیرساختارها، عدم تجاوز مقررات زایی از حد بهینه، حداقل پیچیدگی قوانین و فرآیندها و نیز حداقل انحراف در قیمت نهادهها و ستاده تئاتر منجر شود و علاوه بر اینها، از هر گونه مداخله صلاحدیدی پرهیز نماید. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| عملکرد دولت؛ هنرهای نمایشی؛ سیاست عمومی؛ مداخله دولت | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Government Intervention in Iranian Performing Arts Market: Lessons and Policy Implications | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| zahra Khoshbooi1؛ Mohammad Hosseini2؛ Mohammad Ali Aboutorabi3 | ||
| 1M.A. Student of Economics of the Arts, Imam Reza International University | ||
| 2Assistant Professor of Economics, Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy | ||
| 3Ph. D. in Economics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Government interventions can play an important role in the production process. Since there are different views on government intervention in the market, this paper discusses these views and explains the current situation of government intervention in Iran's theater production. In order to explain the effects of government intervention on theater market, theater productions data during the period 1389 to 1394 were used. The results indicate that government tries to manage the market through infrastructure development, regulations, price distortions and some discretionary policies, but the effectiveness is not as expected. The paper discusses policy implications of Iranian experience of government intervention in theater productions. These implications suggest that the interventionist government should set its policies base on more development of infrastructures, not regulating more than optimum, least complexity of the rules and procedures and minimum distortions in prices of inputs and outputs, and in addition, strictly avoids any discretionary intervention. Government interventions can play an important role in the production process. Since there are different views on government intervention in the market, this paper discusses these views and explains the current situation of government intervention in Iran's theater production. In order to explain the effects of government intervention on theater market, theater productions data during the period 1389 to 1394 were used. The results indicate that government tries to manage the market through infrastructure development, regulations, price distortions and some discretionary policies, but the effectiveness is not as expected. The paper discusses policy implications of Iranian experience of government intervention in theater productions. These implications suggest that the interventionist government should set its policies base on more development of infrastructures, not regulating more than optimum, least complexity of the rules and procedures and minimum distortions in prices of inputs and outputs, and in addition, strictly avoids any discretionary intervention. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Government performance, Performing arts, Public Policy, Government intervention, Iran | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
الف) فارسی 1- ابینگ، هانس (1392). درآمدی بر اقتصاد استثنایی هنر؛ چرا هنرمندان فقیرند، ترجمه حمیدرضا ششجوانی، اصفهان: انتشارات دانشگاه هنر اصفهان. 2- ﭘﯿﮑﺎک، آﻟﻦ (1376). اﻗﺘﺼﺎد ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ و ﺳﯿﺎﺳﺖﻫﺎی ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﯽ، ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﯿﮕﯽ و ﻋﻠﯽ اﻋﻈﻢ، تهران: ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن ﭼﺎﭘﺨﺎﻧﻪ و اﻧﺘﺸﺎرات وزارت ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ و ارﺷﺎد اﺳﻼﻣﯽ. 3- تراسبی، دیوید (1387). اقتصاد و فرهنگ، ترجمه کاظم فرهادی، تهران: نشر نی. 4- فتحی، بهروز (1392). سالنامه آماری فرهنگ و هنر، تهران: نشر شلاک. 5- فریدمن، میلتون (1367). آزادی انتخاب، ترجمه حسین حکیم‌زاده جهرمی، تهران: نشر پارسی. 6- گینزبرگ، وﯾﮑﺘﻮر و ﺗﺮاﺳﺒﯽ، دﯾﻮﯾﺪ (1392). اﻗﺘﺼﺎدِ ﻫﻨﺮ، ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪرﺿﺎ ﻣﺮﯾﺪی، ﻣﺮﯾﻢ ﻻوی، ﻣﻌﺼﻮﻣﻪ ﺗﻘﯽزادﮔﺎن و زﻫﺮا ﺷﺮﯾﻌﺘﯽﻓﺮ، مشهد: اﻧﺘﺸﺎرات ﺑﺪﺧﺸﺎن. 7- مریدی، محمدرضا و تقی‌زادگان، معصومه (1390). سیاستگذاری و برنامه‌ریزی اجتماعی برای توسعه فعالیت‌های اقتصادی بخش فرهنگ: ارزیابی طرح کلان رونق بخشی به بازار هنر ایران در دهه 1380، فصلنامه جامعه‌شناختی ایران. تهران، شماره (2): 109-131. ب) انگلیسی 8- Adelman, I. (2000). The Role of Government in Economic Development. F. Tarp (Ed.). 48-79. Routledge, London: Aghio 9- Anderson, K., & Hayami, Y. (1986). The Political Economy of Agricultural Protection (Sydney: Allen ft Unwin). 10- Baumol, W. J. & Bowen, W. G. (1967). Performing Arts: The Economic Dilemma. Twentieth Century Fund. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund. 11- Baumol, W. J. (1993). Health Care, Education and the Cost Disease: A Looming Crisis for Public Choice. Public Choice. (77), 17-28. 12- Berleant, A. (1980). Subsidization of Art as Social Policy. Journal of Cultural Economics. (4), 63–72. 13- Borgonovi, F. (2005). Public Policy and the Performing Arts: Intended and Unintended Consequences of Public Subsidies. Thesis the University of London for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. London: School of Economics and Political Science. 14- Brundtland, G. H. (2000). Mental Health in the 21st Century. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. (78)4, 411-411. 15- Caves, R. E. (2000). Creative Industries: Contracts between Art and Commerce. Cambridge: Harvard University press. 16- Culyer, A. J. (2010). The dictionary of health economics. Edward Elgar Publishing. 17- Clark, C. & Jung, C. (2002). Implications of the Asian Flu for Developmental State Theory: The Cases of South Korea and Taiwan. Asian Affairs: An American Review. (29)1, 16-42. 18- Cwi, D. (1980). Public Support of the Arts: Three Arguments Examined. Journal of Cultural Economics. (4)2, 39-62. 19- Danto, A. C. (1981). The Transfiguration of the Commonplace. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 20- Davidson, J. (1984). Tax-Related Development Strategies for Local-Government. Real Estate Law Journal. (13)2, 121-140. 21- Daude, C., Yeyati, E. L., & Nagengast, A. J. (2016). On the Effectiveness of Exchange Rate Interventions in Emerging Markets. Journal of International Money and Finance, 64, 239-261. 22- Fazioli, R. & Filippini, M. (1997). Cost Structure and Product Mix of Local Public Theatres. Journal of Cultural Economics. (21), 77–86. 23- Feld, A. L. (2008). Revisiting Tax Subsidies for Cultural Institutions. Cultural Economics. (32), 275–279. 24- Frey, B. S. (1999). State Support and Creativity in the Arts: Some New Considerations. Journal of Cultural Economics. (23), 71–85. 25- Frey, B. S. (2000). Arts and Economics: Analysis and Cultural Policy. Berlin: Springer Verlag. 26- Grimsey, D. & Lewis, M. (2004). Public Private Partnerships: The Worldwide Revolution in Infrastructure Provision and Project Finance. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham: UK. 27- Hayami, Y. (2005). Development Economics: From the Poverty to the Wealth of Nations. Oxford University Press. 28- Hayek, F. A. (1971). Tiger by the Tail. Ludwig von Mises Institute. A (4). 29- Hirschman, A. O. (1958). The Strategy of Economic Development (No. HD82 H49). 30- Horowitz, H. (1988). Public Support for Art: Viewpoints Presented at The Ottawa Meeting S. Journal of Cultural Economics. (13), 1-20. 31- Hume, D. (1742). Of Delicacy in Taste and Passion. In: Hume, D. (Ed.), Essays, Moral, Political and Literary. Liberty Fund, Indianapolis. 32- Keynes, J. M. (1936). The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. Macmillan: London. 33- Krueger, A. O. (1974). The Political Economy of the Rent Seeking Society. American Economic Review. (64)3, 291-303. 34- La Porta, R, Lopez-de-Silanes, F. & Shleifer, A. (2002). Government Ownership of Banks. Journal of Finance. (57)1, 256- Lange, M., Bullard, J., Luksetich, W. & Jacobs, P. (1985). Cost Functions for Symphony Orchestras. Journal of Cultural Economics. 9, 71–85. 35- Lin, J., Cai, F., & Li, Z. (1998), Competition, Policy Burdens, and State-owned Enterprise Reform. American Economics Review. 88, 422-427. 36- Lindsay, C. M. (1969). Option Demand and Consumer's Surplus. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. (83)2, 344-346. 37- Mathur, I., & Marcelin, I. (2015). Institutional Failure or Market Failure?. Journal of Banking & Finance, 52, 266-280. 38- McCain, R. A. (1982). Optimal Subsidies to the Arts in a Shortsighted World. Journal of Cultural Economics, 6, 15 -32. 39- Menger, C. (1871). Grundsätze der volkswirthschaftslehre. (1). 40- O’Hagan, J. (1998). The State and the Arts. An Analysis of Key Economic Policy Issues in Europe and the United States. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar 41- Peacock, A. (1969). Welfare Economics and Public Subsidies to the Arts. Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies. 4 (December). 323–35. 42- Pennathur, A., Smith, D., & Subrahmanyam, V. (2014). The Stock Market Impact of Government Interventions on Financial Services Industry Groups: Evidence from the 2007-2009 Crisis. Journal of Economics and Business, 71, 22-44. 43- Polanyi, K. (1957). The Great Transformation:(The Political and Economic Origin of Our Time). Boston: Beacon Press. 44- Russell, M. (1980). Comments on Art Subsidy- Distribution Effects and the Public Purse. Journal of Cultural Economics. (4), 75 -80. 45- Samli, A. C. (2010). Infrastructuring: The Key to Achieving Economic Growth, Productivity, and Quality of Life. Springer Science & Business Media. 46- Schiff, M., & Valdés, A. (1992). A Synthesis of the Economics in Developing Countries. (4) of The Political Economy of Agricultural Pricing Policy. World Bank Comparative Studies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 47- Schulze, G. G., & Ursprung, H. W. (2000). La Donna e Mobile–or Is She? Voter Preferences and Public Support for the Performing Arts. Public Choice. (102)1-2, 129-147. 48- Smith, A. (1776/1976). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, eds. R. H. Campbell, A. S. Skinner and W. B. Todd, 2 Vols., Oxford, Clarendon Press. 49- Stiglitz, J. E. (1994). The Role of the State in Financial Markets. Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on Economic Development 1993. Washington: World Bank. 50- Timmer, C. P. (1973). Choice of Technique in Rice Milling on Java. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, (9)2, 57-76. 51- Towse, R. (2010). A Textbook of Cultural Economics. Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York. 52- Throsby, D. (2001). Economic and Culture. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 53- Vaughan, R. J. (1977). The Use of Subsidies in the Production of Cultural Services. Journal of Cultural Economics. (1)1, 82 -92. 54- Van der Ploeg. F. (2004). Comment. Journal of Cultural Economics. (28)4, 275 -61. 55- Von Benda – Beckman F. & T. Van Meijl (eds.) (1999). Property Rights and Economic Development. London: Kegan Paul. 56- Yeyati, L. E., Micco, A., Panizza, U., Detragiache, E., & Repetto, A. (2007). Are Appraisal of State-Owned Banks. Journal of Cultural Economics. (7)2, 209-259. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,001 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,593 |
||