找回密码
 To register

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

扫一扫,访问微社区

Titlebook: Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis; Peter Self Textbook 1975Latest edition Macmillan Publ

[复制链接]
查看: 42389|回复: 42
发表于 2025-3-21 17:44:39 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis
编辑Peter Self
视频video
图书封面Titlebook: Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis;  Peter Self Textbook 1975Latest edition Macmillan Publ
出版日期Textbook 1975Latest edition
关键词economics; policy; political economy; political science; politics; science and technology
版次1
doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-86169-9
copyrightMacmillan Publishers Limited 1975
The information of publication is updating

书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis影响因子(影响力)




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis影响因子(影响力)学科排名




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis网络公开度




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis网络公开度学科排名




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis被引频次




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis被引频次学科排名




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis年度引用




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis年度引用学科排名




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis读者反馈




书目名称Econocrats & the Policy Process: The Politics & Philosophy of Cost-Benefit Analysis读者反馈学科排名




单选投票, 共有 1 人参与投票
 

0票 0.00%

Perfect with Aesthetics

 

1票 100.00%

Better Implies Difficulty

 

0票 0.00%

Good and Satisfactory

 

0票 0.00%

Adverse Performance

 

0票 0.00%

Disdainful Garbage

您所在的用户组没有投票权限
发表于 2025-3-21 22:03:49 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 02:45:33 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 07:05:56 | 显示全部楼层
apricious or unreasoning and lacks consistent preferences? The short answer of course is that one can only give a man his preferences to the extent that he has any, and the analyst must do his best with the data available.
发表于 2025-3-22 09:38:30 | 显示全部楼层
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16155-1 general models of decision-making. These are no more than loose logical frameworks, but they help to illustrate some basic problems about the choice of different methodologies for reaching decisions.*
发表于 2025-3-22 14:33:58 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 19:44:25 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-22 22:47:38 | 显示全部楼层
发表于 2025-3-23 01:37:16 | 显示全部楼层
Planning and Cost-Benefit general models of decision-making. These are no more than loose logical frameworks, but they help to illustrate some basic problems about the choice of different methodologies for reaching decisions.*
发表于 2025-3-23 08:42:54 | 显示全部楼层
 关于派博传思  派博传思旗下网站  友情链接
派博传思介绍 公司地理位置 论文服务流程 影响因子官网 SITEMAP 大讲堂 北京大学 Oxford Uni. Harvard Uni.
发展历史沿革 期刊点评 投稿经验总结 SCIENCEGARD IMPACTFACTOR 派博系数 清华大学 Yale Uni. Stanford Uni.
|Archiver|手机版|小黑屋| 派博传思国际 ( 京公网安备110108008328) GMT+8, 2025-5-4 06:10
Copyright © 2001-2015 派博传思   京公网安备110108008328 版权所有 All rights reserved
快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表