Walker Douglas M
Department of Economics Finance & Marketing, Campus Box 14, Georgia College & State University, Milledgeville, GA 31061-0490, USA.
J Gambl Stud. 2003 Summer;19(2):149-84. doi: 10.1023/a:1023629331837.
The appropriate way to classify and measure the "social costs" of gambling is a very important, unresolved methodological issue that has been addressed by Collins and Lapsley (2000); Thompson, Gazel, and Rickman (1999); and Walker and Barnett (1999), among others. What should be included and excluded from social cost studies continues to be a controversial issue, as illustrated in the literature and recent conferences. This paper is an attempt to explain the "economics" conception of social costs in accessible language. By using a simple economic model and everyday examples, it shows that the economics methodology is better than the other methodologies currently available. There are four specific goals of the paper: (1) Discuss the importance of the social cost methodological debate and the state of research in the area; (2) Explain the Walker-Barnett definition of social cost in the context of a simple production possibilities frontier and indifference curve model; (3) Use simple illustrative examples to show why many of the alleged social costs should not be classified as such; and (4) Suggest a new method for analyzing the social costs and effects attributable to pathological gambling.
对赌博的“社会成本”进行分类和衡量的恰当方法,是一个非常重要但尚未解决的方法论问题,柯林斯和拉普斯利(2000年)、汤普森、加泽尔和里克曼(1999年)以及沃克和巴尼特(1999年)等人都曾探讨过这一问题。社会成本研究中应包含哪些内容以及排除哪些内容,仍然是一个有争议的问题,正如文献和近期会议所表明的那样。本文试图用通俗易懂的语言解释社会成本的“经济学”概念。通过使用一个简单的经济模型和日常例子,本文表明经济学方法论比目前可用的其他方法论更具优势。本文有四个具体目标:(1)讨论社会成本方法论辩论的重要性以及该领域的研究现状;(2)在简单的生产可能性边界和无差异曲线模型的背景下解释沃克 - 巴尼特对社会成本的定义;(3)用简单的示例说明为什么许多所谓的社会成本不应被如此归类;(4)提出一种分析病态赌博所致社会成本和影响的新方法。