Idealism versus pragmatism in user evaluations of allocation systems

Bibliographic Data

ID11216360
AuthorsBo Shelby (Oregon State University, corresponding author), Doug Whittaker (Bureau of Land Management), Mark Danley (Bonneville Power Administration)
Year1989
Volume11
Issue1
Pages61-70
Publication date1989-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueLeisure Sciences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0149-0400 • E-ISSN: 1521-0588
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/01490408909512205
OpenAlexW2154362323
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited7

Permit allocation systems in recreation settings attempt to distribute permits in a manner which is “socially just.”; “Distributive justice,”; however, is an ideal that can be defined in terms of several competing social goals, and practical allocation alternatives may not explicitly address any of them. In addition, individuals may not evaluate systems based upon such ideals, but rather upon a pragmatic assessment about whether a system is likely to favor them. Data from a survey of river runners on the Snake River in Hell's Canyon are used to analyze evaluations of allocation alternatives, based on perceived fairness and perceived chances of success. Results suggest that willingness to try an alternative is a pragmatic evaluation more strongly associated with perceived likelihood of success than with fairness or acceptability. In contrast, acceptability is a more idealistic evaluation strongly associated with fairness, which in turn is associated with likelihood of success. Implications for designing and managing allocation systems under conditions of resource scarcity are discussed. Keywords: allocationrationingequitypermits

Epistemology · Idealism · Pragmatism · Sociology · Game Theory and Voting Systems · Philosophy · Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub