The co‐optation of squatters in Amsterdam and the emergence of a movement meritocracy: a critical reply to Pruijt

This article explains how and why the relationship between the Amsterdam squatter movement and the local government has changed over the last decade. Besides reassessing Pruijt's analysis of the Amsterdam squatter movement in a recent issue of this journal, the article also engages with the post‐Fordist literature on social movements. This literature is largely based on the assumption that a subversive identity is incompatible with co‐optation. However, as such ‘soft factors’ as culture gain more importance in urban growth strategies, it is likely that some segments of urban movements may become co‐opted while retaining their subversive identity. It is hypothesized that we are witnessing the emergence of a movement meritocracy: with the rise of soft neoliberal urban policies, the way in which the local polity delivers incentives follows an increasingly discriminatory pattern, giving a place to those segments that contribute to the cultural vibrancy of the city whilst ignoring segments that struggle for basic provisions. These processes are probably not peculiar to Amsterdam and there is an urgent need for post‐Fordist and other social movement theory to investigate what are the consequences of these shifts for government‐movement interactions. Comment et pourquoi la relation entre le mouvement des squatters d'Amsterdam et le gouvernement local a‐t‐elle changé au cours de la dernière décennie? Outre l'examen de l'analyse qu'a faite Pruijt du mouvement des squatters d'Amsterdam dans un récent numéro de cette revue, l'article s'appuie sur la littérature post‐fordiste des mouvements sociaux. Celle‐ci se fonde surtout sur l'hypothèse qu'une identité subversive est incompatible avec une cooptation. Or, comme les ‘facteurs intangibles’ tels que la culture prennent de l'importance dans les stratégies d'expansion urbaine, il est probable que certains segments des mouvements urbains pourront être cooptés tout en gardant leur nature subversive. On suppose l'apparition d'une méritocratie des mouvements: avec l'essor des politiques urbaines néolibérales de compromis, la manière dont le gouvernement local propose des mesures d'incitation suit un modèle de plus en plus discriminatoire, donnant une place aux segments qui contribuent à la vibration culturelle de la ville, tout en ignorant ceux qui luttent pour des services de base. Les processus n'étant sans doute pas propres à Amsterdam, il est urgent que les théories des mouvements sociaux, post‐fordistes ou autres, étudient les conséquences de ces changements dans les interactions entre gouvernement et mouvements.     

Does ignoring multidestination trips in the travel cost method cause a systematic bias?

The present paper demonstrates that treating multidestination trips (MDT) as single-destination trips does not involve any systematic upward or downward bias in consumer surplus (CS) estimates because the direct negative effect of a price increase (treating MDT as a single-destination trip) is offset by a shift in the estimated demand curve. Still, ignoring MDT can greatly underestimate or overestimate the CS. In addition, we demonstrate that there is a sound theoretical basis for using preference information for allocating travel costs between different sites included in the MDT package. A novel extreme value approach is proposed, which does not require any overly restrictive assumptions about consumer preferences. This approach is applied to the zonal travel cost model of the Bellenden Ker National Park, Australia. Parametric and non-parametric estimation techniques are used for calculating CS estimates, and the effects of different MDT treatments and estimation methods are compared.     

Differentiating the consumer benefits from labeling of GM food products

Although recurrent evidence is found that consumers have different willingness to pay for GM and non-GM products, there is disagreement in the scientific community about the size of consumer benefits from GM labeling. In this article we use a theoretical model based on a standard constant elasticity of substitution (CES) to explain the importance of the quality effect. It is shown that failing to consider the quality effect may yield an overestimation of benefits from GM labeling, voluntary or mandatory.     

Standing on the shoulder of giants: the aspect of free-riding in RePEc rankings

Research papers in economics (RePEc) rankings have become a well-established source of information about actual and perceived academic performance of institutions, academic fields and their authors. One essential ingredient is the impact factors calculated in RePEc which differ from the standard ones. RePEc reports the ratio of the cumulative citations of all articles of a journal and the number of listed items. The continuously updated RePEc impact factors account for the whole journal and citation history. This approach gives rise to a potential free-riding of authors who profit from journal ranking established in the past. In this article, we demonstrate how the rankings of economists change if one calculates yearly impact factors. The distribution of gains and losses is most pronounced among middle-field ranked authors while the top group shows relative persistence.