第一篇：中文翻譯英文012.12.30

1.hanfanying

2.許多人離開(kāi)家去找食物 Many people lefts their homes to go in search of food

3.她與2000年畢業(yè)不久成為了一名老師She graduated in 2000 and before long she became a teacher

4.他走到人群的面前He made hies way to the crowd

5.她張貼出一張有關(guān)學(xué)校組織去法國(guó)旅游的布告 She put up a notice about the school trip to France

6.她去牛津上大學(xué)的消息簡(jiǎn)直好得令人無(wú)法相信 The news that she went to Oxford University is too good the true

1.上大學(xué)時(shí)他們相遇并相愛(ài)了They met and fell in love at allege

2.我不知道他為什么不喜歡他的女婿I don’t know why he doesn’t like his son-in-law

3.我很榮幸你們請(qǐng)我在大會(huì)上講話(huà)I am flattered that you asked me to speak at the meeting

4.這會(huì)時(shí)一個(gè)乞丐眼成為一個(gè)百萬(wàn)富翁This will make a beggar a millionaire in a minute

1.他們的婚禮將在教堂舉行Their marriage ceremony will be performed in the church

2.冰淇淋經(jīng)常用作正餐之后的一種甜點(diǎn)Ice cream is usually served as dessert after the main course

3.士兵們裝扮成了普通老板姓The soldiers disguised themselves as ordinary people

4.公共汽車(chē)太擠了我?guī)缀踬嵅贿^(guò)身來(lái)The bus so full chat i could hardly turn around

5.這個(gè)氣球是有帆布制成的形狀像個(gè)猴子The balloon is made of canvas and it’s shape like monkey

1.在一個(gè)朋友家小住幾天給他寫(xiě)一封感謝信是禮貌的做法It is polite to write a thank-you letter after staying for a few days with a friend

2.她把手指放在嘴唇前示意大家安靜下來(lái)She put her finger to her lips a sign to be quite

3.他們每年可以享受30天的帶薪年假They can enjoy a 30 day paid holiday every year

4.當(dāng)我告訴他你要來(lái)她先的很驚訝She expressed when i toldher you were coming

5.恰恰相反許多學(xué)生更加珍惜課外與老師之間的交流On the contrary many student appreciate all the more communication with their teacher out of class

1.他們已把兒子撫養(yǎng)長(zhǎng)大能自食其力了They have brought up their to sand on their own feet

2.我們請(qǐng)專(zhuān)家來(lái)?yè)?dān)任政府顧問(wèn)Experts were brought in to advise the government

3.因?yàn)檫@場(chǎng)大雨我們只好把野營(yíng)推遲了We had to put off the camping as a result of the heavy rain

4.煤可以轉(zhuǎn)化為煤氣Coal can be converted to gas

5.這是語(yǔ)法練習(xí)的答案This is the key to the grammar exercises

1.他在購(gòu)買(mǎi)服裝上花了很多錢(qián)She sends a lot of money on clothes

2.計(jì)算機(jī)在辦公室中起到重要作用 computers play an important role in office work

3.努力工作可以達(dá)到成功hard work leads to success

4.他們投身于我國(guó)的西部大開(kāi)發(fā)they devote themselves to the development of the western part of our country

5.簡(jiǎn)參加多項(xiàng)學(xué)?；顒?dòng)jane takes part in many school activities

1.各組人民都沉在節(jié)日的氣氛之中different varieties of people are in festival atmosphere

2.除非馬上還清欠款否則我和你打官司i’ll take you to court unless you pay up immediately

3.我沒(méi)有注意到周?chē)氖挛飅 was not aware of my surroundings

1.她偶爾不得不吃安眠藥occasionally she had to take sleeping pills

2.這本字典的新版本還未發(fā)行the new version of this dictionary is not in use yet

3.承蒙足下推薦我已獲得這份工作i got the job thanks to recommendation

4.她終于嫁給了最執(zhí)著追求的她的人she eventually married the most persistent one of her admirers

5.她能很快記住許多資料she can memorize facts very quickly

1.我仍然堅(jiān)持我的觀(guān)點(diǎn)i still insist on my viewpoint

2.到時(shí)候我們會(huì)人通知你we will inform you in due course

3.我們既不打籃球也不打排球we are going play neither basketball nor volleyball

4.我總是開(kāi)著窗戶(hù)睡覺(jué)除非天氣非常冷菜關(guān)上窗戶(hù)i always keep the window open when i sleep unless it is very cold

5.你或是你的父親今天必須見(jiàn)這位年輕人either you or your father must see this young man today

Yingfahan

1.before long she was disappointed and unable to find a job so she took to the streets to do everything she could to earn money不久他沒(méi)有找到工作使他很失望因此流露街頭盡可能維持生計(jì)

2.The mother having heard of her daughter’s whereabouts went to the poor parts of the city in search of her daughter 媽媽聽(tīng)到有女兒的消息后媽媽趕往貧窮的城市尋找女兒

3.Concerned for her mother’s safety the young woman ran to the bedroom and shook her mother awake and said it’s me 他考慮到媽媽的安全跑到了臥室搖醒了媽媽說(shuō)是我是我4.In the eyes of Americans Thanksgiving Day is an important festival just next to Christmas

5.It dates back to the arrival of some of the first European settlers in the New world who survived their first cold winter with the help of their native Indian neighbors那些早期的移民在印度安人的幫助下他們?cè)谀抢锒冗^(guò)了第一個(gè)寒冬

6.Many days before the festival shops supermarkets and restaurants decorate their show windows with colorful lights and exhibits and promise great discounts 在節(jié)日的前幾天商店超市和飯店五彩繽紛的燈和美不勝收的展品裝飾櫥窗還說(shuō)要降價(jià)

7.The lonely old folks could enjoy temporary happiness while they joined the celebration activities 當(dāng)孤寡老人參加慶?；顒?dòng)時(shí)獲得短暫愉快

8.He thought that the key to feeding people was to have more rice and produce it more quickly他認(rèn)為人們吃飯的關(guān)鍵有更多的大米和更快的生產(chǎn)

9.Which could give a higher yield than either of the original plants它可以給更高的收益率比原先任何植物

10.As a result of yuan long ping’s discovery Chinese discovery Chinese rice production rose by 45.5%in the 1900s由于袁隆平的發(fā)現(xiàn)中國(guó)的水稻產(chǎn)量咋20世紀(jì)90年代增長(zhǎng)了45.5%

11.But if you probe a little deeper you will find that personal circumstances and a better quality of lite are the two most compelling factors driving people away from their offices如果你再深入研究你會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)個(gè)人的境況和更好的生活質(zhì)量是促使人們離開(kāi)辦公室的兩個(gè)最值得關(guān)注的原因

12.On an overcrowded tube i was commuters were being pushed around tempers were being fraved and a few people were crying 我在擁擠的地鐵里上下班的人推推擠擠有些人發(fā)脾氣有些人呼喊

13.As a Chinese learn of english your problems when it comes to writing probably have to do with organization of content and basic sentence structure對(duì)學(xué)習(xí)英語(yǔ)的中國(guó)人來(lái)說(shuō)寫(xiě)作時(shí)你會(huì)遇到內(nèi)容組織和基本句子結(jié)構(gòu)等一些問(wèn)題

14.In that case you work in a specific field with specific challenges that may not be covered in this course你在一個(gè)特殊的環(huán)境里工作有特定的寫(xiě)作挑戰(zhàn)二我們的課程不可能滿(mǎn)足所有學(xué)生的要求

15.You will then save the new version and carry on with occasional editing and improving每次編輯環(huán)節(jié)之后你的文本會(huì)有所改進(jìn)你應(yīng)該保存這些新版本并繼續(xù)不時(shí)的編輯和改進(jìn)

16.Of course you will have to allow yourself some time to put what you have learned into practice and practice eventually makes you perfect 當(dāng)然你你不得不把你自己學(xué)到的東西運(yùn)用實(shí)踐最終你使你自己更完美

17.If you say the word communication most people think of work and sentences 說(shuō)起交流大多數(shù)人想到單詞和句子

18.Although these are very important we communicate with more than just spoken and written words.indeed body positions are part of what we call body language雖然這些單詞和句子很重要但我們并不只是用口語(yǔ)和書(shū)面語(yǔ)交流身勢(shì)語(yǔ)是我們說(shuō)話(huà)的一部分

19.We see examples of unconscious body language very often yet there is also learned body language which varies

from culture to culture我們經(jīng)常看到無(wú)意識(shí)的身勢(shì)語(yǔ)但也有習(xí)得的身勢(shì)語(yǔ)習(xí)得的身勢(shì)語(yǔ)在不同的文化中各不相同 20.The internet chat room is a new and popular forum in which people meet new friends from around the word stories of chatters falling in love are very common 網(wǎng)絡(luò)聊天室是一個(gè)新的流行的論壇，使人們認(rèn)識(shí)新朋友來(lái)自世界各地的故事，也愛(ài)是很常見(jiàn)的21.However some experts say chat chatting can be addictive and they point out that problem lies in the chatters然而一些專(zhuān)家說(shuō)聊天可能上癮，他們指出問(wèn)題在于聊天者本人

第二篇：AE濾鏡英文-中文翻譯

一.3D Channel 三維通道

1.3D Channel Extract 提取三維通道 2.Depth Matte 深度蒙版 3.Depth of Field 場(chǎng)深度 4.Fog 3D 霧化 5.ID matte ID蒙版

二.Audio 音頻 1.Backwards 倒播

2.Bass/Treble 低音和高音 3.Delay 延遲

4.Flange/Chorus 變調(diào)和合聲 5.High-Low Pass 高低音過(guò)濾 6.Modulator 調(diào)節(jié)器

7.Parametric EQ EQ參數(shù) 8.Reverb 回聲

9.Stereo Mixer 立體聲混合 10.Tone 音質(zhì)

三.Blur/Sharpen 模糊與銳化 1.Box Blur 方形模糊 2.Channel Blur 通道模糊 3.Compound Blur 混合模糊 4.Directional Blur 方向模糊 5.Fast Blur 快速模糊 6.Gaussian Blur 高斯模糊 7.Lens Blur 鏡頭模糊 8.Radial Blur 徑向模糊

9.Reduce Interlace Flicker 減少交錯(cuò)閃爍(與高斯模糊相似)10.Sharpen 銳化

11.Smart Blur(沒(méi)什么效果的模糊效果)12.Unsharp Mask 反遮罩銳化

四.Channel 通道

1.Alpha Levels Alpha色階 2.Arithmetic 運(yùn)算 3.Blend 混合

4.Calculations 計(jì)算

5.Channel Combiner 通道組合 6.Compound Arithmetic 復(fù)合計(jì)算 7.Invert 反相

8.Minimax 擴(kuò)亮擴(kuò)暗

9.Remove Color Matting 刪除蒙版顏色 10.Set Channels 設(shè)置通道 11.Set Matte 設(shè)置蒙版

12.Shift Channels 轉(zhuǎn)換通道 13.Solid Composite 實(shí)色合成

五.Color Correction 顏色修正 1.Auto Color 自動(dòng)顏色

2.Auto Contrast 自動(dòng)對(duì)比度 3.Auto Levels 自動(dòng)色階

4.Brightness/Contrast 亮度和對(duì)比度 5.Broadcast Colors 廣播級(jí)顏色 6.Change Color 轉(zhuǎn)換色彩

7.Change to Color 定向轉(zhuǎn)換色彩 8.Channel Mixer 通道混合 9.Color Balance 色彩平衡

10.Color Balance(HLS)色彩平衡HLS 11.Color Link 色彩鏈接

12.Color Stabilizer 色彩穩(wěn)定器 13.Colorama 彩光 14.Curves 曲線(xiàn) 15.Equalize 均衡 16.Exposure 暴光

17.Gamma/Pedestal/Gain 伽馬/基色/增益 18.Hue/Saturation 色調(diào)/飽合度 19.Leave Color 保留顏色 20.Levels 色階

21.Levels(Individual Controls)色階(個(gè)別控制)22.Photo Filter 圖片過(guò)濾 23.PS Arbitrary Map 映象

24.Shadow/Highlight 陰影/亮光 25.Tint 色彩

六.Distort 扭曲

1.Bezier Warp 貝塞爾曲線(xiàn)彎曲 2.Bulge 凹凸鏡

3.Corner Pin 邊角定位 4.Displacenent Map 置換 5.Liquify 液化 6.Magnify 放大

7.Mesh Warp 網(wǎng)格變形 8.Mirror 鏡像 9.Offset 位移

10.Optics Compensation 鏡頭變形 11.Polar Coordinates 極坐標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)換 12.Reshape 形變 13.Ripple 波紋 14.Smear 涂抹 15.Spherize 球面化 16.Transform 變換

17.Turbulent Displace 劇烈置換 18.Twirl 扭轉(zhuǎn) 19.Warp 彎曲

20.Wave Warp 波浪變形

七.Expression Controls 表達(dá)式控制 1.Angle Control 角度控制

2.Checkbox Control 檢驗(yàn)盒控制 3.Color Control 色彩控制 4.Layer Control 層控制 5.Point Control 點(diǎn)控制 6.Slider Control 游標(biāo)控制

八.Generate 產(chǎn)生(以前叫渲染)1.4-Color Gradient 四色漸變 2.Advanced Lightning 高級(jí)閃電 3.Audio Spectrum 聲譜 4.Audio Waveform 聲波 5.Beam 光束

6.Cell Pattern 單元圖案 7.Checkerboard 棋盤(pán)格 8.Circle 圓形 9.Ellipse 橢圓

10.Eyedropper Fill 滴管填充 11.Fill 填充 12.Fractal 分形 13.Grid 網(wǎng)格

14.Lens Flare 鏡頭光暈 15.Lightning 閃電

16.Paint Bucket 油漆桶 17.Radio Waves 電波 18.Ramp 漸變 19.Scribble 涂寫(xiě) 20.Stroke 描邊 21.Vegas 勾畫(huà)

22.Write-on 書(shū)寫(xiě)(有遮罩的功能)

九.Keying 鍵控

1.Color Difference Key 色彩差異鍵控< 2.Color Key 色彩鍵控 3.Color Range 色彩范圍 4.Difference Matte 差異蒙版 5.Extract 提取

6.Inner/Outer Key 輪廓鍵控

7.Linear Color Key 線(xiàn)性色彩鍵控 8.Luma Color Key 亮度鍵控 9.Spill Suppressor 溢色抑制

十.Matte 蒙版工具

1.Matte Choker 蒙版清除 2.Simple Choker 簡(jiǎn)單清除

十一.Noise/Grain 雜色/噪點(diǎn) 1.Add Grain 添加顆粒

2.Dust/Scratches 蒙塵與劃痕 3.Fractal Noise 分形噪波 4.Match Grain 匹配噪點(diǎn) 5.Median 中值 6.Noise 雜色

7.Noise Alpha Alpha雜色 8.Noise HLS HLS雜色

9.Noise HLS Auto 自動(dòng)HLS雜色 10.Remove Grain 清除噪點(diǎn)

十二.Paint繪畫(huà) 1.Paint 繪畫(huà)

2.Vector Paint 矢量繪畫(huà)

十三.Perspective 透視 1.3D Glasses 3D視覺(jué) 2.Basic 3D 基礎(chǔ)三維 3.Bevel Alpha Alpha導(dǎo)角 4.Bevel Edges 邊緣導(dǎo)角 5.Drop Shadow 投影

6.Radial Shadow 徑向投影

十四.Simulation 仿真 1.Card Dance 卡片動(dòng)畫(huà) 2.Caustics 腐蝕 3.Foam 水泡

4.Particle Playground 粒子游樂(lè)場(chǎng) 5.Shatter 爆碎

6.Wave World 水波 十五.Stylize 風(fēng)格化

1.Brush Strokes 畫(huà)筆描邊 2.Color Emboss 彩色浮雕 3.Emboss 浮雕

4.Find Edges 查找邊緣 5.Glow 輝光 6.Mosaic 馬賽克

7.Motion Tile 運(yùn)動(dòng)拼貼

8.Posterize 多色調(diào)(相當(dāng)有16位色32位色)9.Roughen Edges 粗糙邊緣 10.Scatter 擴(kuò)散

11.Strobe Light 閃光燈 12.Texturize 紋理化 13.Threshold 閾值

十六.Text 文字

1.Basic Text 基本文字 2.Numbers 數(shù)字

3.Path Text 路徑文字 4.Timecode 時(shí)間代碼

十七.Time 時(shí)間 1.Echo 重影

2.Posterize Time 招貼畫(huà) 3.Time Difference 時(shí)間差異 4.Time Displacement 時(shí)間置換 5.Timewarp 時(shí)間扭曲

十八.Transition 切換

1.Block Dissolve 塊面溶解 2.Card Wipe 卡片擦拭 3.Gradient Wipe 漸變擦拭 4.Iris Wipe 星形擦拭 5.Linear Wipe 線(xiàn)性擦拭 6.Radial Wipe 徑向擦拭 7.Venetian Blinds 百葉窗

十九.Utility 效用 1.Cineon Converter 2.Color Profile Converter 3.Grow Bounds 4.HDR Compander 5.HDR Highlight Compression

第三篇：英文采訪(fǎng)稿(附中文翻譯)

STUDENT NUMBER: A12120272 NAME: Shilei CLASS: English 1202

Inorder to find out what the life it was in the past in China, I intervewed a grangpa in our shool’s little park, who is at about his 60s.Q(Question): Hello, nice to meet you.Thank you for accepting my interview.A(Answer): Nice to meet you too.Q: Em, you look like about at 60s, right? Would you like to tell me when people mostly used bikes? A:Yeah, I was born in 1953 and I’m 61years old now.Actually, you know China was been named of “The Kingdom of Bicycle” in the past.I remember my grandpa told me that bicycle was introduced in China in the late 19th century.Then in 1960s, 1970s, when I was a young man, bicycle along with sewing machine and watch became the necessary three-major-items of marriage.Bicycle became really popular in the 1980s, it was the most important and most universal vehicle at that moment, the famous brands included “Yong jiu”, “Fenghuang”, “Feige”.The flow of thousands of bicycles during the rush hour was extremly awesome which made China became “The Kingdom of Bicycle”.You might cannot realize that kind of feeling, but you have to know who had a bicycle at that time woule be jealous by others, especially our young guys.Q: But a bicycle must be very expensive at that time, right? A: Certainly!One bicycle costed about 200 yuanat that time while people’s salary just a few dozen yuan.It’s very precious.Q: Em, what about bus? When buses appeared? And how the buses of today compare with the buses when you were young? A: Haerbin’s buses were developed in the 1950s.When I was young , buses in Haerbin were still not widespread, just several bus-lines were operated.What’s more, the buses’ environment and situation were not very well when compared with the buses of today.Q: Well, I got it.How life was in your 20s’, 30s’, and 40s’? And every day life how it changed when you grew older? A: In my 20s’ , what I remember most was that you had to take the tickets or certificates to buy all the things you wanted and needed , and the number of those stuff was fixed by government, so you couldn’t buy a lot even you had money.Like the liquor, you had to buy it in state-run stores with certificate.If you wanted more, you might suppose to borrow the certificate from other family which was begrudge to buy the liquor , for the numeber of liquor was limited.And later, the individual business appeared and became more and more, so you could buy anything with money in stores.Since followed the policy of reform and opening, our daily lives became more and more colorful.Q: Do you rememberhow life changed when tall building were built? A：Em...In fact, the tall building didn’t bring much impact on our lives.At the beginning, we might feel shocked or wondering, but later we gradually accustomed to it.You can see, there are tall building everywhere nowadays.Q: What do you miss about the old days and what you do not miss? A: What I miss...May be the simplicity and kindness of those people, besides, at that time, they worked harder and braver.But I enjoy the high life quality of today, comprehensive health care system, varieties of entertainments, convenient public transit, etc.You know, the life in the old days is difficult.A: Yeah, sure it is.Alright then, thank to your narration, I know more details about the life in the old days, thank you!Q：It’s my pleasure!為了了解過(guò)去中國(guó)的生活是什么樣的，我在學(xué)校的小公園里采訪(fǎng)了一位60多歲的老爺爺。

問(wèn)：您好，很高興見(jiàn)到您，謝謝您能夠接受我的采訪(fǎng)。

答：認(rèn)識(shí)你也很高興。

問(wèn)：你看起來(lái)大概60歲左右對(duì)嗎？您能不能跟我講一下人們用自行車(chē)最多是在什么時(shí)候呢？ 答：當(dāng)然。我出生于1953年，今年都61歲了。事實(shí)上，中國(guó)在過(guò)去被稱(chēng)為“自行車(chē)王國(guó)”呢。我記得我的姥爺告訴我自行車(chē)是在19世紀(jì)后期引進(jìn)中國(guó)的。在六、七十年代，那時(shí)候我還年輕，自行車(chē)和縫紉機(jī)、手表是年輕人結(jié)婚必備的“三大件”。自行車(chē)真正流行起來(lái)是在80年代，那個(gè)時(shí)候自行車(chē)是最重要、最普遍的交通工具，出名的牌子有“永久”、“鳳凰”、“飛鴿”。那個(gè)時(shí)候上下班高峰期自行車(chē)流非常壯觀(guān)，中國(guó)也因此被稱(chēng)為“自行車(chē)王國(guó)”。你們現(xiàn)在可能體會(huì)不到那種感覺(jué)，但是在那個(gè)時(shí)候擁有一輛自行車(chē)是讓人非常羨慕嫉妒的，特別是我們年輕人。

問(wèn)：但是那個(gè)時(shí)候一輛自行車(chē)肯定很貴對(duì)吧？

答：那是肯定的！一輛自行車(chē)要200塊錢(qián)左右，而那個(gè)時(shí)候人們的工資只有十幾、幾十塊。所以自行車(chē)很珍貴。

問(wèn)：嗯，那公交車(chē)呢，公交車(chē)什么時(shí)候出現(xiàn)？今天的公交車(chē)跟你們年輕時(shí)候的比起來(lái)又怎么樣呢？

答：哈爾濱的公交應(yīng)該是在50年代發(fā)展起來(lái)吧。我年輕的時(shí)候，公交還不是很普及，只有幾條線(xiàn)路投入運(yùn)行。而且，公交車(chē)的環(huán)境和狀況跟如今的比起來(lái)都很差。

問(wèn)：嗯，那您20歲、30歲、40歲的時(shí)候生活是怎樣的呢?隨著您的年長(zhǎng)，日常生活有哪些變化呢？

答：我20歲的時(shí)候，印象最深刻的是你買(mǎi)任何東西都需要票或者證。因?yàn)樗袞|西的數(shù)量是有國(guó)家按人口規(guī)定好的，所以即使你有錢(qián)你也買(mǎi)不了很多。像酒，你要拿著證去供銷(xiāo)社買(mǎi)。如果你還想要的話(huà)，你就要借其他人的證去買(mǎi)。因?yàn)槊考揖频臄?shù)量是一定的，但是有的人家舍不得買(mǎi)。后來(lái)個(gè)體商戶(hù)出現(xiàn)了而且越來(lái)越多，就可以拿錢(qián)買(mǎi)任何想要的東西。自從改革開(kāi)放政策的實(shí)行，我們的生活變得越來(lái)越豐富多彩。

問(wèn)：您能給我講講當(dāng)高樓大廈建起來(lái)的時(shí)候生活發(fā)生了哪些改變嗎？

答：嗯....事實(shí)上，高樓大廈并沒(méi)有給我們的生活帶來(lái)很大影響。剛開(kāi)始，我們看到可能會(huì)感嘆會(huì)迷惑，但是后來(lái)慢慢就習(xí)慣了。你看現(xiàn)在到處都是高樓林立。

問(wèn)：那對(duì)于過(guò)去的日子有哪些是您非常懷念的，哪些是不怎么懷念的呢？

答：嗯....要說(shuō)懷念的話(huà)，應(yīng)該是懷念過(guò)去人們的淳樸善良吧，而且那時(shí)候人們也更加勤勞勇敢。但是我更享受現(xiàn)在的高品質(zhì)生活，完善的醫(yī)療體系，多樣的娛樂(lè)活動(dòng)，便利的公共交通等等，這些都是過(guò)去不能比的。你要知道過(guò)去的生活很艱苦。

問(wèn)：是的，肯定比現(xiàn)在要苦。好的，非常感謝您抽出時(shí)間接受采訪(fǎng)，通過(guò)您的講述我對(duì)以前的生活知道了更多細(xì)節(jié)，謝謝！

答：不用謝，很高興能幫到你。

第四篇：激勵(lì)機(jī)制英文文獻(xiàn)和中文翻譯

How to Motivate Every Employee

---James·Cameron

Incentive is the core of human resource management.Production and management in the enterprise management, human resources is economic resources with a variety of thoughts, feelings, the most dynamic summation also love that economic resources, but also the soul of enterprise in this organism, therefore, human resources production and management resources than other more important resources, and decisions not only affect the production and operation of enterprises of other economic resources, the value and use, and the province is the enterprise strength of several important components of quality of human resources as a result of production and management in the enterprise economic resources of the status and role, so the effectiveness of corporate governance or the ultimate ideal to achieve the objective should be: every enterprise employees will be able to give top priority to the overall interests of enterprises and business goals , the interests of all willing to contribute their own.Employees of such a mental state of thinking and Normal under oath in order to reflect the difficult, but it is entrepreneurs, managers should be pursued and the ultimate challenge, it is necessary to approach such a state, only through an effective internal incentives.Therefore, the most important task of enterprise management is the human resources management.Traditional personnel management and labor is different from a modern human resources management performance of the main features of the “strategic” level:(one)at the strategic guiding ideology of modern human resource management is “people-oriented” management;(two)the strategic objectives modern human resources management in order to “obtain a competitive advantage,” the objectives of management;(three)the scope of the strategy, the modern human resources management is the “full participation in” democratic management;(four)measures in the strategy of modern human resources management is the use of “systematic scientific methods and human art” contingency management.And non-human resources management, compared to human resources management through the “incentives” to achieve, it is the core of human resources management.The so-called “incentive” to meet people from the multi-level and diversified needs of different employees and reward performance standards set value, a maximum staff to stimulate enthusiasm and creativity to achieve the objectives of the Organization.An enterprise of how the use of human resources is determined by many complex factors in the result of the coupling, but the role of management incentives is one of the most important factors.Unlike other non-human resources of the fundamental characteristics of human resources is that it attached to the staff and the existence of the human body, personal moment with the staff can not be separated, such other person or organization to use human resources, both by its natural all the people of “positive take the initiative ”can be achieved with.Therefore, human resources management can “people-oriented” and effectively to stimulate the enthusiasm of employees, to maximize the staff's initiative and creativity, has become the decision of the merits of enterprise production and management of key performance factors and human resources management business success core of the problem.Employee incentive measures.Incentives for the management of human resources management in particular, the importance of self-evident.Incentives can be adopted by all of, the enterprises need to attract them;also can make the most of the employees to perform their talents and wisdom;work so as to maintain the effectiveness and efficiency.Incentive not only to make employees feel at ease, and actively work to play it so staff recognition and acceptance of the enterprise goals

and values, the enterprise have a strong sense of belonging.According to the United States, Professor William James of Harvard University study, in the absence of incentive environment, the potential for staff to play out only a small part of that is 20%-30%, first-served basis just to keep their rice bowls;and in a good incentive mechanism for the environment, the same staff can play a potential 80%-90%, it can be seen, so that each employee is always a good incentive environment is the management of human resources development and the pursuit of the ideal state.So how do we inspire employees to effectively correct the times?

First,Adhere to people-centered, respect for human nature, and establish and implement the “employee-centric” management concept.“People-oriented, respect for humanity” as a modern management philosophy, emphasizing the ultimate goal of management-to improve the economic efficiency of enterprises on the people behind the management of behavior is no longer a cold cold command type, the compulsory type.But carrying out an incentive, trust, caring, emotional, manager of human nature embodies a high degree of understanding and attach importance to managers as employees can not be purely “economic man” in order to meet their survival needs and material interests of the management an opportunity to but to pay attention to the employees respect the spirit of self-actualization needs at higher level in order to provide creative work and encouraging personality to play to mobilize the enthusiasm of employees, in the equal exchange of lead and establish the concept of corporate management;the external control into self-control, so that each employee to form their own sense of corporate loyalty and a sense of responsibility, so that the value of employees to achieve personal and business survival and development into a passer-by, if the enterprises do not know how to be people-oriented, and lack of basic understanding of human nature and respect for , to the neglect of the personal value of human resources to enable employees to achieve long-term needs of the individual values can not be met or even depression, will not be able to retain the best talent, companies will lose competitiveness.Therefore, we must do the following:

Staff carry out regular surveys to understand the extent possible, a matter of concern to employees, especially those relevant to their work, and to win the support and loyalty of staff, and staff to guide the spirit of innovation, attract and retain employees, companies should strive to collect the following the desired information staff: the fairness of work;organizational learning;communication;degree of flexibility and concern;Customer Center;trust and delegation of authority;the effectiveness of management;job satisfaction, the adequacy of support, was placed in a suitable role , and whether or not to feel valuable.Focus on staff remuneration, benefits, working conditions, as well as flexible, to facilitate the preferential arrangements.Enterprises should change with the times, in addition to the traditional emphasis on staff remuneration, welfare and the improvement of working conditions but also the possibility of other incentives, such as the provision of day care;serving University;tuition grants;shorter working hours in summer;the implementation of employee stock option plan;set up a remote post office and so on.Second, the implementation of a comprehensive compensation strategy to motivate employees to fully.The so-called “comprehensive compensation strategy”, which means the company will pay the salaries of employees classified as “external” and “inherent” in two categories, a

combination of the two is the “full pay”, “external pay ”referring primarily to provide their employees with quantifiable monetary value, for example, the basic wage bonuses, stock options, pension, medical insurance and so on,“ internal pay ”refers to those provided to employees can not be quantified the performance of monetary value of various currencies.For example, work satisfaction, for the completion of its work to facilitate the provision of personal tools, training opportunities, attractive corporate culture, good interpersonal relations, coordination of the work environment, as well as individual recognition, appreciation and so on, external salaries and pay their own internal incentives have different functions.Their contact with each other, complement each other, constitute a complete system of remuneration, practice has proved that as a result of staff-to-business expectations and needs to be comprehensive, which includes not only material needs, but also spiritual needs, and thus the implementation of “full pay” strategy, is an effective model of staff motivation.Third,incentives should be fair, just and eliminate incentives for “big”.Fair and impartial is a fundamental principle of motivation.If you do not fair, improper Prize Award, improper punishment and punishment, not only can not receive the desired results, but will result in many negative consequences, it is necessary to impartial and incorruptible, regardless of affinity, regardless of distance, will be treated equally in order to promote the enthusiasm of the staff along the right direction virtuous circle, as proposed by the United States manage the academic award as the criteria.Only by doing so can enhance the cohesion and centripetal force.At the same time, incentives are clearly ancient times people believed in the basic management principles.In fact if the additional money as wages, as it is unrelated to individual performance and reward, employees feel they deserve it, rather than the result of the efforts, so that people can not be stimulated and motivated.Therefore, the smart managers should do everything possible to reward and recognize performance combine it with the cause of loyalty, dedication to the cause of the close combination of fact, the staff inside the imbalance is that they do good , there are dedicated, but work with people who do not receive the same treatment.This is often not satisfied with the staff and leadership reasons, incentives to companies linked to behavior and employee benefits, the higher the protection of personal value, the greater their income, and through incentives to create a fair competitive environment to increase the comparability of results, and promote up groups.To sum up, the management of enterprises in the use of incentives should be people-oriented, pay attention to and strengthen the strong spirit of enterprise and development of mining resources to improve the workers compensation which the degree of non-material rewards, in the determination and implementation of policies and work rules and regulations in, and strive to embody the principle of fair and equitable.Employees should not blindly encourage unrealistic earnings expectations increase, otherwise you will enable enterprises to individual workers or groups of incentives and constraints arising from the difficulties, the effectiveness of decline, more difficult.中文翻譯：

如何激勵(lì)每一位員工

---詹姆斯·卡梅隆

激勵(lì)是人力資源管理的核心。

在企業(yè)生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)管理中，人力資源是企業(yè)各種經(jīng)濟(jì)資源中具有思想、感情、最求和能動(dòng)性的亦喜愛(ài)那個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)資源，也是企業(yè)這一有機(jī)體的靈魂，因此，人力資源是比其它生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)資源更為重要的一項(xiàng)資源，它不僅影響和決定了企業(yè)其他生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)經(jīng)濟(jì)資源的價(jià)值和使用狀況，而且其本省就是企業(yè)實(shí)力幾家質(zhì)量的重要組成部分之一，由于人力資源在企業(yè)生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)經(jīng)濟(jì)資源中的地位和作用，所以企業(yè)管理工作成效的極致或者說(shuō)要達(dá)到的理想境界的目標(biāo)應(yīng)該是：企業(yè)內(nèi)的每一個(gè)員工都能將企業(yè)的整體利益放在首位，并為企業(yè)的目標(biāo)、利益甘愿貢獻(xiàn)自己的一切。職工的這樣一種思想和精神狀態(tài)在宣誓中師很難以體現(xiàn)的，但卻是企業(yè)家、管理者孜孜以求和所要挑戰(zhàn)的極限，要趨近這樣的一種狀態(tài)，只有通過(guò)企業(yè)內(nèi)部的有效激勵(lì)。因此，企業(yè)管理工作的重中之重是人力資源管理。與傳統(tǒng)勞動(dòng)人事管理不同，現(xiàn)代人力資源管理的主要特征表現(xiàn)在“戰(zhàn)略性”層面上：（1）在戰(zhàn)略指導(dǎo)思想上，現(xiàn)代人力資源管理是“以人為本”的管理；（2）在戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)上，現(xiàn)代人力資源管理是為了“獲取競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)”的目標(biāo)管理；（3）在戰(zhàn)略范圍上，現(xiàn)代人力資源管理是“全員參加”的民主管理；（4）在戰(zhàn)略措施上，現(xiàn)代人力資源管理是運(yùn)用“系統(tǒng)化科學(xué)方法和人文藝術(shù)”的權(quán)變管理。與非人力資源管理相比較，人力資源管理是通過(guò)“激勵(lì)”來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)的，它是人力資源管理的核心。所謂“激勵(lì)”，就是從滿(mǎn)足人的多層次、多元化需要出發(fā)，針對(duì)不同員工設(shè)定績(jī)效標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)值，一最大限度地激發(fā)員工工作積極性和創(chuàng)造性去實(shí)現(xiàn)組織的目標(biāo)。一個(gè)企業(yè)的人力資源利用效果如何，是由許多復(fù)雜因素耦合作用的結(jié)果，但其中管理的激勵(lì)作用是最重要的因素之一。

人力資源不同于其他非人力資源的根本特征就是，它依附于員工的人體而存在，與員工個(gè)人須臾不可分離，其他人或組織要使用人力資源，都要經(jīng)由它的天然所有這個(gè)人的“積極主動(dòng)”配合才能實(shí)現(xiàn)。因此，人力資源管理工作能否“以人為本”，有效激發(fā)員工的積極性，最大限度地發(fā)揮員工的主觀(guān)能動(dòng)性和創(chuàng)造性，就成為決定企業(yè)生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)績(jī)效優(yōu)劣的關(guān)鍵因素和企業(yè)人力資源管理成功與否的核心問(wèn)題。

企業(yè)員工激勵(lì)的措施。

激勵(lì)對(duì)管理特別是人力資源管理的重要性自不待言。通過(guò)激勵(lì)能把所有才能的、本企業(yè)所需要的人吸引過(guò)來(lái)；也可以使本企業(yè)員工最充分地發(fā)揮其才能和智慧；從而保持所從事工作的有效性和高效率。激勵(lì)不僅在于能使職工安心，積極地工作，它還發(fā)揮使職工認(rèn)同和接受本企業(yè)的目標(biāo)和價(jià)值觀(guān)，對(duì)企業(yè)產(chǎn)生強(qiáng)烈的歸屬感。據(jù)美國(guó)哈佛大學(xué)的教授威廉·詹姆士研究，在缺乏激勵(lì)的環(huán)境中，人員的潛力只發(fā)揮出了一小部分，即20%—30%，剛剛能保住飯碗即止；而在良好的激勵(lì)機(jī)制環(huán)境中，同樣的人員即可發(fā)揮出潛力的80%—90%，由此可見(jiàn)，使每位員工始終處于良好的激勵(lì)環(huán)境中是人力資源開(kāi)發(fā)和管理所追求的理想狀態(tài)。那么，如何才能正確有效地激發(fā)員工的時(shí)期呢？ 首先、堅(jiān)持以人為本，尊重人性，樹(shù)立并貫徹“以員工為中心”的管理觀(guān)念。

“以人為本，尊重人性”作為現(xiàn)代管理理念，強(qiáng)調(diào)把管理的最終目的——提高企業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)效益放在人的背后，管理行為不再是冰冷冷的命令型、強(qiáng)制型。而是貫徹著激勵(lì)、信任、關(guān)心、情感，體現(xiàn)著管理者對(duì)人性的高度理解和重視，管理者不能把員工視為單純的“經(jīng)濟(jì)人”，以滿(mǎn)足其生存需要

和物質(zhì)利益作為管理契機(jī)，而是要注重員工的尊重，自我實(shí)現(xiàn)等高層次精神需求，以提供創(chuàng)造性的工作，鼓勵(lì)個(gè)性的發(fā)揮來(lái)調(diào)動(dòng)員工的積極性，在平等的引導(dǎo)和交流中，建立起企業(yè)的經(jīng)營(yíng)理念；將外部控制轉(zhuǎn)化為自我控制，使每個(gè)員工自發(fā)地形成對(duì)企業(yè)的忠誠(chéng)感和責(zé)任感，進(jìn)而使員工的個(gè)人價(jià)值實(shí)現(xiàn)和企業(yè)的生存發(fā)展歸為一途，如果企業(yè)不懂得以人為本，對(duì)人性缺乏基本的了解和尊重，忽視了人才的個(gè)人價(jià)值，使員工實(shí)現(xiàn)個(gè)人價(jià)值的需求長(zhǎng)期得不到滿(mǎn)足甚至壓抑，就無(wú)法留住最好的人才，企業(yè)也將因此失去競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力。為此，必須做到以下幾點(diǎn)：

經(jīng)常開(kāi)展員工調(diào)查，盡可能了解員工所關(guān)心的事，尤其是與其工作相關(guān)的事，以贏(yíng)得員工的支持和忠誠(chéng)，并可引導(dǎo)員工的創(chuàng)新精神，吸引并留住員工，企業(yè)應(yīng)致力于收集以下員工所期望的信息：工作中的公平性；組織學(xué)習(xí)；溝通；靈活性和關(guān)心度；顧客中心；信任和授權(quán)；管理的有效性；工作滿(mǎn)意程度，被支持的充分性，被安置角色的合適性，是否感覺(jué)到有價(jià)值。

著力于員工報(bào)酬、福利、工作條件的改善以及靈活、便利性的優(yōu)惠安排。企業(yè)應(yīng)隨著時(shí)代的變化，除了注重傳統(tǒng)意義上的員工報(bào)酬、福利和工作條件的改善以外，還可以實(shí)施其他的優(yōu)惠措施，如提供日托；在職大學(xué)學(xué)習(xí)；學(xué)費(fèi)補(bǔ)助；縮短夏季工作時(shí)間；實(shí)施員工股票期權(quán)計(jì)劃；設(shè)置遠(yuǎn)程辦公崗位等等。

其次、實(shí)施全面薪酬戰(zhàn)略，給員工以充分的激勵(lì)。

所謂“全面薪酬戰(zhàn)略”，即公司將支付給員工的薪酬分為“外在”和“內(nèi)在”的兩大類(lèi)，兩者的結(jié)合即為“全面薪酬”，“外在的薪酬”主要指為員工提供可量化的貨幣性?xún)r(jià)值，比如，基本工資獎(jiǎng)金、股票期權(quán)、退休金、醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)等等，“內(nèi)在的薪酬”則是指那些給員工提供的不能以量化的貨幣形式表現(xiàn)的各種貨幣價(jià)值。比如，對(duì)工作的滿(mǎn)意度，為完成工作而提供個(gè)人便利工具，培訓(xùn)的機(jī)會(huì)，吸引人的公司文化，良好的人際關(guān)系，相互配合的工作環(huán)境，以及公司對(duì)個(gè)人的表彰、謝意等，外在的薪酬和內(nèi)在的薪酬各自具有不同的激勵(lì)功能。它們互相聯(lián)系，互為補(bǔ)充，構(gòu)成完整的薪酬體系，實(shí)踐證明，由于員工對(duì)企業(yè)的期望和需求是全面的，其中既包括物質(zhì)需求，又包括精神需求，因而實(shí)施“全面薪酬”戰(zhàn)略，是員工激勵(lì)的有效模式。

第三、獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)應(yīng)公平、公正、杜絕獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)“大鍋飯”

公平公正是激勵(lì)一個(gè)基本原則。如果不公平公正，獎(jiǎng)不當(dāng)獎(jiǎng)，罰不當(dāng)罰，不僅收不到預(yù)期的效果，反而會(huì)造成許多消極后果，要鐵面無(wú)私，不論親疏，不分遠(yuǎn)近，一視同仁，以促進(jìn)員工的積極性沿著好的方向良性循環(huán)，就像美國(guó)管理學(xué)界提出的獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)準(zhǔn)則那樣。只有這樣做，才能增強(qiáng)企業(yè)的凝聚力和向心力。同時(shí)，獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)分明是從古至今人們所信奉的基本管理原則。如果把獎(jiǎng)金當(dāng)成實(shí)際上的附加工資，當(dāng)成是與個(gè)人表現(xiàn)無(wú)關(guān)的報(bào)酬，員工就覺(jué)得這是他們應(yīng)得的，而不是努力的結(jié)果，這樣就不能激人上進(jìn)。因此，聰明的管理者應(yīng)盡一切可能把報(bào)酬和績(jī)效表彰結(jié)合起來(lái)，把它與對(duì)事業(yè)的忠誠(chéng)，對(duì)事業(yè)的奉獻(xiàn)緊密結(jié)合起來(lái)，實(shí)際上，員工內(nèi)心最不平衡的事是，自己干得好，有奉獻(xiàn)，卻與不干活的人待遇一樣。這也常是員工與領(lǐng)導(dǎo)不滿(mǎn)意的原因，要把公司獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)行為與員工利益掛鉤，保障個(gè)人創(chuàng)造價(jià)值越高，其收益越大，并通過(guò)獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)創(chuàng)造公平的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)環(huán)境，增加成績(jī)的可比性，促進(jìn)群體向上。

綜上所述，企業(yè)在使用激勵(lì)管理時(shí)，應(yīng)以人為本，注重和強(qiáng)化企業(yè)內(nèi)部精神極力資源的挖掘和開(kāi)發(fā)，提高職工報(bào)酬當(dāng)中非物質(zhì)報(bào)酬的程度，在判定和落實(shí)各項(xiàng)政策和規(guī)章制度的工作中，力求體現(xiàn)公平和公正性原則。不宜盲目地助長(zhǎng)員工預(yù)期目標(biāo)收益不切實(shí)際地增加，否則就會(huì)使企業(yè)對(duì)職工個(gè)體或群體的激勵(lì)措施產(chǎn)生困難和制約，有效性下降，難度增加。

第五篇：一篇經(jīng)濟(jì)類(lèi)英文論文(含中文翻譯)

The Problem of Social Cost

社會(huì)成本問(wèn)題

RONALD COASE 羅納德·科斯

Ronald Coase is Professor Emeritus at University of Chicago LawSchool and a Nobel Laureate in Economics.This article is fromThe Journal of Law and Economics(October 1960).Several passages devoted to extended discussions of legal decisions

have been omitted.羅納德·科斯在芝加哥大學(xué)法學(xué)院名譽(yù)教授和諾貝爾經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)獎(jiǎng)得主。本文是其外法學(xué)與經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)雜志（1960年10月）。專(zhuān)門(mén)的法律問(wèn)題的決定的延伸討論的幾個(gè)

段落已被省略。

I.THE PROBLEM TO BE EXAMINED This paper is concerned with those actions of business firms which have harm-ful effects on others.The standard example is that of a factory the smoke from which has harmful effects on those occupying neighbouring properties.The economic analysis of such a situation has usually proceeded in terms of a divergence between the private and social product of the factory, in which economists have largely followed the treatment of Pigou in The Economies of Welfare.The conclusion to which this kind of analysis seems to have led most economists is that it would be desirable to make the owner of the factory li-able for the damage caused to those injured by the smoke, or alternatively, to place a tax on the factory owner varying with the amount of smoke produced and equivalent in money terms to the damage it would cause, or finally, to exclude the factory from residential districts(and presumably from other areas in which the emission of smoke would have harmful effects on others).It is my contention that the suggested courses of action are inappropriate, in that they lead to results which are not necessarily, or even usually, desirable.一、要檢查的問(wèn)題

本文關(guān)注的是這些行動(dòng)的企業(yè)有傷害他人有用的影響。標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的例子是，一個(gè)工廠(chǎng)的煙霧從那些占領(lǐng)鄰近物業(yè)的有害影響。在這種情況下的經(jīng)濟(jì)分析，通常已在工廠(chǎng)的私人和社會(huì)產(chǎn)品之間的分歧方面著手，在經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家們基本上遵循治療庇古福利經(jīng)濟(jì)。這種分析的結(jié)論，似乎使大多數(shù)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家是工廠(chǎng)里的煙霧，或者受傷的人造成的損害能夠使雇主，這將是可取的，上放置一個(gè)稅在金錢(qián)方面的損害，或最后，它會(huì)導(dǎo)致排除住宅區(qū)（大概是從其他地區(qū)排放的煙霧將有對(duì)他人有害影響）工廠(chǎng)廠(chǎng)主不同的金額產(chǎn)生的煙霧，相當(dāng)于。行動(dòng)的建議的課程是不合適的，因?yàn)樗鼈儗?dǎo)致的結(jié)果是不一定，甚至是通常情況下，可取的，它是我的論點(diǎn)。

II.THE RECIPROCAL NATURE OF THE PROBLEM The traditional approach has tended to obscure the nature of the choice that has to be made.The question is commonly thought of as one in which A inflicts harm on B and what has to be decided is: how should we restrain A? But this is wrong.We are dealing with a problem of a reciprocal nature.To avoid the harm to, B would inflict harm on A.The real question that has to be decided is: should A be allowed to harm B or should B be allowed to harm A? The problem is to avoid the more serious harm.I instanced in my previous article the case of a confectioner the noise and vibrations from whose machinery disturbed a doctor in his work.To avoid harming the doctor would inflict harm on the confectioner.The problem posed by this case was essentially whether it was worth while, as a result of restricting the methods of production which could be used by the confectioner, to secure more doctoring at the cost of a reduced supply of confectionery products.Another example is afforded by the problem of straying cattle which destroy crops on neighbouring land.If it is inevitable that some cattle will stray, all increase in the supply of meat can only be obtained at the expense of a decrease in the supply of crops.The nature of the choice is clear: meat or crops.What answer should be given is, of course, not clear unless we know the value of what is obtained as well as the value of what is sacrificed to obtain it.To give another example, Professor George J.Stigler instances the contamination of a stream.If we assume that the harmful effect of the pollution is that it kills the fish, the question to be decided is: is the value of the fish lost greater or less than the value of the product which the contamination of the stream makes possible.It goes almost without saying that this problem has to be looked at in total and at the margin.二、互惠性的問(wèn)題

傳統(tǒng)的做法往往掩蓋作出的選擇，自然。這個(gè)問(wèn)題通常被認(rèn)為作為一個(gè)在B上一個(gè)敵人造成的傷害和什么要決定的是：我們應(yīng)該如何抑制一個(gè)？但這是錯(cuò)誤的。我們正在處理的互惠性質(zhì)的問(wèn)題。為了避免傷害，B將A上造成的危害，真正的問(wèn)題，必須決定是：應(yīng)該允許A損害B或應(yīng)允許B傷害嗎？問(wèn)題是要避免更嚴(yán)重的傷害。我在我以前的文章中實(shí)例化一個(gè)糕點(diǎn)師的噪音和振動(dòng)機(jī)械不安醫(yī)生在他的工作情況。為了避免傷及醫(yī)生會(huì)造成傷害的糕點(diǎn)。基本上這種情況下所造成的問(wèn)題是它是否值得，作為一種限制方法可以用于糕點(diǎn)生產(chǎn)的結(jié)果，以爭(zhēng)取更多的糖果產(chǎn)品的供應(yīng)減少，成本篡改。另一個(gè)例子是給予由偏離破壞鄰近土地上的農(nóng)作物的牛的問(wèn)題。如果這是不可避免的，一些牛會(huì)偏離，只能獲得所有的肉類(lèi)供應(yīng)增加作物供應(yīng)減少開(kāi)支。選擇的性質(zhì)是明確的：肉類(lèi)或農(nóng)作物。應(yīng)給予什么樣的答案是，當(dāng)然，不明確的，除非我們知道得到什么價(jià)值，以及什么犧牲得到它的價(jià)值。給另一個(gè)例如，教授喬治·J.斯蒂格勒實(shí)例流的污染。如果我們假定污染的有害影響是，它殺死的魚(yú)，將要決定的問(wèn)題是：是魚(yú)的價(jià)值損失大于或小于流的污染，使產(chǎn)品的價(jià)值。當(dāng)然，幾乎沒(méi)有說(shuō)，這個(gè)問(wèn)題要看著總保證金。

III.THE PRICING SYSTEM WITH LIABILITY FOR DAMAGE I propose to start my analysis by examining a case in which most economists would presumably agree that the problem would be solved in a compeletely satisfactory manner: when the damaging business has to pay for all damage caused and the pricing system works smoothly(strictly this means that the operation of a pricing system is without cost).A good example of the problem under discussion is afforded by the case of straying cattle which destroy crops growing on neighbouring land.Let us sup-pose that a farmer and cattle-raiser are operating on neighbouring properties.Let us further suppose that, without any fencing between the properties, an increase in the size of the cattle-raiser’s herd increases the total damage to the farmer’s crops.What happens to the marginal damage as the size of the herd increases is another matter.This depends on whether the cattle tend to follow one another or to roam side by side, on whether they tend to be more or less restless as the size of the herd increases and on other similar factors.For my immediate purpose, it is immaterial what assumption is made about marginal damage as the size of the herd increases.Given that the cattle-raiser is liable for the damage caused, the additional annual cost imposed on the cattle-raiser if he increased his herd from, say, 2 to 3 steers is $3 and in deciding on the size of the herd, he will take this into account along with his other costs.That is, he will not increase the size of the herd unless the value of the additional meat produced(assuming that the cattle-raiser slaughters the cattle)is greater than the additional costs that this will entail, including the value of the additional crops destroyed.Of course, if, by the employment of dogs, herdsmen, aeroplanes, mobile radio and other means, the amount of damage can be reduced, these means will be adopted when their cost is less than the value of the crop which they prevent being lost.Given that the annual cost of fencing is $9, the cattle-raiser who wished to have a herd with 4 steers or more would pay for fencing to be erected and maintained, assuming that other means of attaining the same end would not do so more cheaply.When the fence is erected, the marginal cost due to the liability for damage becomes zero, except to the extent that an increase in the size of the herd necessitates a stronger and therefore more expensive fence because more steers are liable to lean against it at the same time.But, of course, it may be cheaper for the cattle-raiser not to fence and to pay for the damaged crops, as in my arithmetical example, with 3 or fewer steers.It might be thought that the fact that the cattle-raiser would pay for all crops damaged would lead the farmer to increase his planting if a cattle-raiser came to occupy the neighbouring property.But this is not so.If the crop was previously sold in conditions of perfect competition, marginal cost was equal to price for the amount of planting undertaken and any expansion would have reduced the profits of the farmer.In the new situation, the existence of crop damage would mean that the farmer would sell less on the open market but his receipts for a given production would remain the same, since the cattle-raiser would pay the market price for any crop damaged.Of course, if cattle-raising commonly involved the destruction of crops, the coming into existence of a cattle-raising industry might raise the price of the crops involved and farmers would then extend their planting.But I wish to confine my attention to the individual farmer.I have said that the occupation of a neighbouring property by a cattle-raiser would not cause the amount of production, or perhaps more exactly the amount of planting, by the farmer to increase.In fact, if the cattle-raising has any effect, it will be to decrease the amount of planting.The reason for this is that, for any given tract of land, if the value of the crop damaged is so great that the receipts from the sale of the undamaged crop are less than the total costs of cultivating that tract of land, it will be profitable for the farmer and the cattle-raiser to make a bargain whereby that tract of land is left uncultivated.This can be made clear by means of an arithmetical example.Assume initially that the value of the crop obtained from cultivating a given tract of land is $12 and that the cost incurred in cultivating this tract of land is $10, the net gain from cultivating the land being $2.I assume for purposes of simplicity that the farmer owns the land.Now assume that the cattle-raiser starts operations on the neighbouring property and that the value of the crops damaged is $1.In this case $11 is obtained by the farmer from sale on the market and $1 is obtained from the cattle-raiser for damage suffered and the net gain remains $2.Now suppose that the cattle-raiser finds it profitable to increase the size of his herd, even though the amount of damage rises to $3;which means that the value of the additional meat production is greater than the additional costs, including the additional $2 payment for damage.But the total payment for damage is now $3.The net gain to the farmer from cultivating the land is still $2.The cattle-raiser would be better off if the farmer would agree not to cultivate his land for any payment less than $3.The farmer would be agreeable to not cultivating the land for any payment greater than $2.There is clearly room for a mutually satisfactory bargain which would lead to the abandonment of cultivation.* But the same argument applies not only to the whole tract cultivated by the fanner but also to any subdivision of it.Suppose, for example, that the cattle have a well-defined route, say, to a brook or to a shady area.In these circumstances, the amount of damage to the crop along the route may well be great and if so, it could be that the farmer and the cattle-raiser would find it profitable to make a bargain whereby the farmer would agree not to cultivate this strip of land.But this raises a further possibility.Suppose that there is such a well de-fined route.Suppose further that the value of the crop that would be obtained by cultivating this strip of land is $10 but that the cost of cultivation is $11.In the absence of the cattle-raiser, the land would not be cultivated.However, given the presence of the cattle-raiser, it could well be that if the strip was cultivated, the whole crop would be destroyed by the cattle.In which case, the cattle-raiser would be forced to pay $10 to the farmer.It is true that the farmer would lose $1.But the cattle-raiser would lose $10.Clearly this is a situation which is not likely to last indefinitely since neither party would want this to happen.The aim of the farmer would be to induce the cattle-raiser to make a payment in return for an agreement to leave this land uncultivated.The farmer would not be able to obtain a payment greater than the cost of fencing off this piece of land nor so high as to lead the cattle-raiser to abandon the use of the neighbouring property.What payment would in fact be made would depend on the shrewdness of the farmer and the cattle-raiser as bargain-ers.But as the payment would not be so high as to cause the cattle-raiser to abandon this location and as it would not vary with the size of the herd, such an agreement would not affect the allocation of resources but would merely alter the distribution of income and wealth as between the cattle-raiser and the farmer.I think it is clear that if the cattle-raiser is liable for damage caused and the pricing system works smoothly, the reduction in the value of production elsewhere will be taken into account in computing the additional cost involved in increasing the size of the herd.This cost will be weighed against the value of the additional meat production and, given perfect competition in the cattle industry, the allocation of resources in cattle-raising will be optimal.What needs to be emphasized is that the fall in the value of production elsewhere which would be taken into account in the costs of the cattle-raiser may well be less than the damage which the cattle would cause to the crops in the ordinary course of events.This is because it is possible, as a result of market transactions, to discontinue cultivation of the land.This is desirable in all cases in which the damage that the cattle would cause, and for which the cattle-raiser would be willing to pay, exceeds the amount which the farmer would pay for use of the land.In conditions of perfect competition, the amount which the farmer would pay for the use of the land is equal to the difference between the value of the total production when the factors are employed on this land and the value of the additional product yielded in their next best use(which would be what the farmer would have to pay for the factors).If damage exceeds the amount the farmer would pay for the use of the land, the value of the additional product of the factors employed elsewhere would exceed the value of the total product in this use after damage is taken into account.It follows that it would be desirable to abandon cultivation of the land and to release the factors employed for production elsewhere.A procedure which merely provided for payment for damage to the crop caused by the cattle but which did not allow for the possibility of cultivation being discontinued would result in too small an employment of factors of production in cattle-raising and too large an employment of factors in cultivation of the crop.But given the possibility of market transactions, a situation in which damage to crops exceeded the rent of the land would not endure.Whether the cattle-raiser pays the farmer to leave the land uncultivated or himself rents the land by paying the land-owner an amount slightly greater than the farmer would pay(if the farmer was himself renting the land), the final result would be the same and would maximise the value of production.Even when the farmer is induced to plant crops which it would not be profitable to cultivate for sale on the market, this will be a purely short-term phenomenon and may be expected to lead to an agreement under which the planting will cease.The cattle-raiser will remain in that location and the marginal cost of meat production will be the same as before, thus having no long-run effect on the allocation of resources.三、損害賠償責(zé)任的定價(jià)制度 我建議開(kāi)始我的分析，通過(guò)審查案件，其中多數(shù)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家大概會(huì)同意將在完全令人滿(mǎn)意的方式解決問(wèn)題的破壞性業(yè)務(wù)時(shí)支付所有所造成的損害和定價(jià)體系工程進(jìn)展順利（嚴(yán)格來(lái)說(shuō)，這意味著定價(jià)制度的運(yùn)作是無(wú)成本）。

正在討論的問(wèn)題的一個(gè)很好的例子是誤入牛毀壞莊稼鄰近土地上生長(zhǎng)的情況下給予。讓我們支持對(duì)一個(gè)農(nóng)民和牛募集鄰近物業(yè)經(jīng)營(yíng)。讓我們進(jìn)一步假設(shè)，沒(méi)有任何圍欄之間的屬性，在牛募集的畜群規(guī)模的增加而增加農(nóng)民的作物的總傷害。會(huì)發(fā)生什么情況，以增加畜群的大小的邊際損害的，則是另一回事。這取決于牛是否會(huì)跟隨一個(gè)或是否他們往往是牛群的增加和規(guī)模上其他類(lèi)似的因素或多或少不安，漫游并排。對(duì)于我的直接目的，它是無(wú)關(guān)緊要的假設(shè)邊際損害為增加畜群的大小。

鑒于這是承擔(dān)，造成損害的額外費(fèi)用的牛的序幕征收，如果他增加從2至3閹他的畜群的牛是$3，并在決定牛群的大小，他將考慮到這一點(diǎn)，隨著他的其他費(fèi)用。也就是說(shuō)，他不會(huì)提高畜群的大小，除非額外的肉產(chǎn)生的價(jià)值（假設(shè)牛的序幕屠宰的牛）的額外費(fèi)用，這將意味著，包括摧毀了其它作物的價(jià)值更大。當(dāng)然，如果就業(yè)的狗，農(nóng)牧民，飛機(jī)，移動(dòng)無(wú)線(xiàn)電和其他手段，可以減少損失數(shù)額，這些手段將通過(guò)他們的成本是低于價(jià)值的作物，它們可以防止丟失。由于是在擊劍成本是$9，在牛的提出者誰(shuí)希望有一群4裝載機(jī)或更多將圍籬支付到被架設(shè)和維護(hù)，假設(shè)，其他手段達(dá)到同樣的目的，不是做這樣更便宜。當(dāng)圍欄架設(shè)，由于損害賠償責(zé)任的邊際成本變?yōu)榱愠某潭?，在牛群?guī)模的增加，需要一個(gè)更強(qiáng)大，因此更昂貴的圍欄，因?yàn)楦嗟墓Ｓ胸?zé)任向它傾斜在同一時(shí)間。但是，當(dāng)然，這可能是牛募集便宜沒(méi)有圍墻受損的作物，在我算術(shù)例如，作為3個(gè)或更少的公牛，并支付。

有人可能會(huì)認(rèn)為牛募集將支付所有損壞莊稼的事實(shí)將導(dǎo)致農(nóng)民增加他的種植牛募集來(lái)占據(jù)鄰近物業(yè)。但事實(shí)并非如此。如果以前在完全競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的條件下出售作物，邊際成本等于價(jià)格進(jìn)行種植量，任何擴(kuò)大農(nóng)民的利潤(rùn)將減少。在新形勢(shì)下，農(nóng)作物損失的存在就意味著農(nóng)民將在公開(kāi)市場(chǎng)上出售的，但他的收入為一個(gè)給定的生產(chǎn)將保持不變，因?yàn)榕Ｄ技Ц度魏纹茐淖魑锏氖袌?chǎng)價(jià)格。當(dāng)然，如果養(yǎng)牛通常涉及毀壞莊稼，到一個(gè)養(yǎng)牛業(yè)存在的到來(lái)可能會(huì)引發(fā)涉及農(nóng)民將擴(kuò)大其種植的農(nóng)作物的價(jià)格。但我希望把我的個(gè)體農(nóng)民的關(guān)注。

我曾經(jīng)說(shuō)過(guò)，占領(lǐng)鄰近由牛募集的屬性不會(huì)導(dǎo)致農(nóng)民增加的生產(chǎn)量，或者更準(zhǔn)確的種植量。事實(shí)上，如果有任何影響的養(yǎng)牛，它會(huì)減少種植量。這樣做的原因是，任何土地道，如果受損作物的價(jià)值是如此之大，從出售完好作物的收入少于培育，大片土地的總成本，這將是為農(nóng)民和牛的序幕，留下大片土地荒廢，使討價(jià)還價(jià)，即有利可圖。這可以通過(guò)一個(gè)算術(shù)例子明確。最初假設(shè)，作物耕種的土地道獲得的價(jià)值是12美元，在培育這一大片土地所需的費(fèi)用是$ 10，$ 2耕種土地的凈收益。我想簡(jiǎn)單，農(nóng)民擁有土地的目的?，F(xiàn)在假設(shè)，在牛的提出者開(kāi)始，損壞農(nóng)作物的價(jià)值$ 1.In這種情況下$ 11獲得由農(nóng)民從銷(xiāo)售市場(chǎng)和$ 1是從的牛的序幕獲得損害遭受的鄰近物業(yè)經(jīng)營(yíng)凈收益仍然為2美元?，F(xiàn)在想，在牛的提出者認(rèn)為它盈利增加他的畜群的大小，即使損壞的數(shù)量上升到3美元;的額外肉類(lèi)生產(chǎn)的價(jià)值大于的額外費(fèi)用，包括了額外的$ 2支付損壞。但損害的支付總額是$ 3。農(nóng)民耕種土地的凈收益仍然是2元。牛的序幕，將是富裕農(nóng)民都同意，如果不培養(yǎng)他的土地，任何支付不到3美元。農(nóng)民將沒(méi)有培養(yǎng)任何大于$ 2支付土地的認(rèn)同。顯然是這將導(dǎo)致放棄種植一個(gè)雙方都滿(mǎn)意的討價(jià)還價(jià)的余地。*但同樣的論點(diǎn)不僅適用于整個(gè)道由電風(fēng)扇培養(yǎng)的，而且也給它的任何細(xì)分。假設(shè)，例如，牛有一個(gè)明確的路線(xiàn)，比方說(shuō)，一條小溪或陰涼的區(qū)域。在這種情況下，對(duì)沿線(xiàn)作物受損金額也可能是巨大的，如果是這樣，可能是，農(nóng)民和牛募集會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)是有利可圖的討價(jià)還價(jià)，農(nóng)民同意不以培養(yǎng)狹長(zhǎng)土地。

但是，這引發(fā)了進(jìn)一步的可能性。假設(shè)有這樣一個(gè)罰款的好路線(xiàn)。進(jìn)一步假設(shè)，作物的價(jià)值將獲得通過(guò)培育這個(gè)地帶是10元，但種植成本11元。在牛募集的情況下，土地不會(huì)種植。然而，給予牛募集的存在，它可能是，如果帶鋼培養(yǎng)，整個(gè)作物將牛銷(xiāo)毀。在這種情況下，牛募集將被迫支付10美元的農(nóng)民。這是真正的農(nóng)民將損失$1。但牛的序幕，將失去10美元。顯然，這是一個(gè)情況，這是不可能無(wú)限期地持續(xù)下去，因?yàn)槿魏我环蕉疾幌Ｍ@種情況發(fā)生。農(nóng)民的目的是誘導(dǎo)牛募集的支付換取了一項(xiàng)協(xié)議，離開(kāi)這片土地荒廢。農(nóng)民將無(wú)法獲得支付大于圍欄這片土地的成本，也沒(méi)有這么高，導(dǎo)致牛募集放棄使用鄰近物業(yè)。哪些付款將在事實(shí)上將取決于作為討價(jià)還價(jià)的精明的農(nóng)民和牛募集。但作為付款就不會(huì)那么高，容易引起牛募集放棄這個(gè)位置，因?yàn)樗粫?huì)隨畜群的大小，這樣的協(xié)議不會(huì)影響資源的分配，但僅僅是改變的分布牛提出者和農(nóng)民之間的收入和財(cái)富。

我認(rèn)為這是明確的，如果牛募集造成的損失承擔(dān)責(zé)任和定價(jià)體系工程進(jìn)展順利，其他地方減少產(chǎn)值將考慮在計(jì)算涉及的額外費(fèi)用，提高畜群的大小。這筆費(fèi)用將額外的肉類(lèi)生產(chǎn)的價(jià)值權(quán)衡，完美的比賽，在養(yǎng)牛業(yè)，養(yǎng)牛將是最佳的資源分配。需要強(qiáng)調(diào)的是，牛募集費(fèi)用，將考慮在其他地方的生產(chǎn)價(jià)值的下降可能是小于牛會(huì)導(dǎo)致在日常事件對(duì)農(nóng)作物的損害。這是因?yàn)樗强赡艿?，作為市?chǎng)交易的結(jié)果，停止種植的土地。在所有情況下的破壞，會(huì)導(dǎo)致牛，牛募集愿意支付超過(guò)數(shù)額的農(nóng)民支付土地使用，這是可取的。在完全競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的條件下，農(nóng)民支付土地使用量等于總生產(chǎn)值之間的差異的因素時(shí)，在這片土地上雇用和其他產(chǎn)品的價(jià)值在他們的未來(lái)產(chǎn)生最好的使用（這是什么農(nóng)民將不得不支付的因素）。如果損害超過(guò)數(shù)量的農(nóng)民支付土地使用，其他地方就業(yè)的因素更多的產(chǎn)品價(jià)值將超過(guò)在此使用的產(chǎn)品總價(jià)值的考慮后損壞。它如下放棄種植的土地，并釋放其他地方生產(chǎn)的因素，這將是可取的。一個(gè)程序，它只是提供付款為牛，但是這并沒(méi)有讓被停止種植的可能性造成作物受損將導(dǎo)致太小，養(yǎng)牛和太大的就業(yè)因素的生產(chǎn)要素的就業(yè)在作物的種植。但考慮到市場(chǎng)交易的可能性，這種情況在對(duì)農(nóng)作物的損害超過(guò)土地租金，就不能忍受。是否牛募集支付農(nóng)民離開(kāi)土地荒廢，或自己租土地，由土地所有者支付金額略高于農(nóng)民將支付（如果農(nóng)民自己租用的土地），最終的結(jié)果將是相同的，將最大限度地提高生產(chǎn)的價(jià)值。即使誘導(dǎo)農(nóng)民種莊稼，它不會(huì)是有利可圖的培養(yǎng)，在市場(chǎng)上出售，這將是一個(gè)純粹的短期現(xiàn)象，預(yù)期可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致根據(jù)該協(xié)議將停止種植。牛募集將保持在該位置和肉類(lèi)生產(chǎn)的邊際成本會(huì)像以前一樣，因此，資源的分配上沒(méi)有長(zhǎng)期的效果。

IV.THE PRICING SYSTEM WITH NO LIABILITY FOR DAMAGE I now turn to the case in which, although the pricing system is assumed to worksmoothly(that is, costlessly), the damaging business is not liable for any of the damage which it causes.This business does not have to make a payment to those damaged by its actions.I propose to show that the allocation of resources will be the same in this case as it was when the damaging business was liable for damage caused.As I showed in the previous case that the allocation of resources was optimal, it will not be necessary to repeat this part of the argument.I return to the case of the farmer and the cattle-raiser.The farmer would suffer increased damage to his crop as the size of the herd increased.Suppose that the size of the cattle-raiser’s herd is 3 steers(and that this is the size of the herd that would be maintained if crop damage was not taken into account).Then the farmer would be willing to pay up to $3 if the cattle-raiser would reduce his herd to 2 steers, up to $5 if the herd were reduced to 1 steer and would pay up to $6 if cattle-raising was abandoned.The cattle-raiser would therefore receive 53 from the farmer if he kept 2 steers instead of 3.This $3 foregone is therefore part of the cost incurred in keeping the third steer.Whether the $3 is a payment which the cattle-raiser has to make if he adds the third steer to his herd(which it would be if the cattle-raiser was liable to the farmer for damage caused to the crop)or whether it is a sum of money whichhe would have received if he did not keep a third steer(which it would be if the cattle-raiser was not liable to the farmer for damage caused to the crop)does not affect the final result.In both cases $3 is part of the cost of adding a third steer, to be included along with the other costs.If the increase in the value of production in cattle-raising through increasing the size of the herd from 2 to 3 is greater than the additional costs that have to be incurred(including the $3 damage to crops), the size of the herd will be increased.Otherwise, it will not.The size of the herd will be the same whether the cattle-raiser is liable for damage caused to the crop or not.It may be argued that the assumed starting point—a herd of 3 steers—was arbitrary.And this is true.But the farmer would not wish to pay to avoid crop damage which the cattle-raiser would not be able to cause.For example, the maximum annual payment which the farmer could be induced to pay could not exceed $9.the annual cost of fencing.And the farmer would only be willing to pay this sum if it did not reduce his earnings to a level that would cause him to abandon cultivation of this particular tract of land.Furthermore, the farmer would only be willing to pay this amount if he believed that, in the absence of any payment by him, the size of the herd maintained by the cattle-raiser would be 4 or more steers.Let us assume that this is the case.Then the farmer would be willing to pay up to $3 if the cattle-raiser would reduce his herd to 3 steers, up to $6 if the herd were reduced to 2 steers, up to $8 if one steer only were kept and up to $9 if cattle-raising were abandoned.It will be noticed that the change in the starting point has not altered the amount which would accrue to the cattle-raiser if he reduced the size of his herd by any given amount.It is still true that the cattle-raiser could receive an additional $3 from the farmer if he agreed to reduce his herd from 3 steers to 2 and that the $3 represents the value of the crop that would be destroyed by adding the third steer to the herd.Although a different belief on the part of the farmer(whether justified or not)about the size of the herd that the cattle-raiser would maintain in the absence of payments from him may affect the total payment he can be induced to pay, it is not true that this different belief would have any effect on the size of the herd that the cattle-raiser will actually keep.This will be the same as it would be if the cattle-raiser had to pay for damage caused by his cattle, since a receipt foregone of a given amount is the equivalent of a payment of the same amount.It might be thought that it would pay the cattle-raiser to increase his herd above the size that he would wish to maintain once a bargain had been made, in order to induce the farmer to make a larger total payment.And this may be true.It is similar in nature to the action of the farmer(when the cattle-raiser was liable for damage)in cultivating land on which, as a result of an agreement with the cattle-raiser, planting would subsequently be abandoned(including land which would not be cultivated at all in the absence of cattle-raising).But such manoeuvres are preliminaries to an agreement and do not affect the long-run equilibrium position, which is the same whether or not the cattle-raiser is held responsible for the crop damage brought about by his cattle.It is necessary to know whether the damaging business is liable or not for damage caused since without the establishment of this initial delimitation of rights there can be no market transactions to transfer and recombine them.But the ultimate result(which maximises the value of production)is independent of the legal position if the pricing system is assumed to work without cost.四、無(wú)損害賠償責(zé)任的電價(jià)體系

現(xiàn)在我想談?wù)劙钢?，雖然定價(jià)體系工作的順利開(kāi)展（即，無(wú)成本），損壞業(yè)務(wù)是不會(huì)造成任何損害承擔(dān)責(zé)任。此業(yè)務(wù)并沒(méi)有使那些破壞其行動(dòng)付款。我建議，以表明在這種情況下，資源的分配將是相同的，因?yàn)樗瞧茐男缘钠髽I(yè)造成的損失承擔(dān)責(zé)任時(shí)。正如我在前面的例子表明，最佳的資源分配，它不會(huì)是必要的重復(fù)這部分的說(shuō)法。我回到了農(nóng)民和牛募集的情況下。農(nóng)民會(huì)受到他的牛群的規(guī)模增加作物的傷害增加。假設(shè)牛募集的畜群的大小是3裝載機(jī)（，這將保持對(duì)作物的損害，如果不考慮畜群的大?。?。那么，農(nóng)民將是愿意以支付高達(dá)3美元的牛的提出者是否會(huì)減少他的畜群2裝載機(jī)，高達(dá)500如果牛群被減少到1引導(dǎo)和將支付高達(dá)6元如果養(yǎng)牛被遺棄。牛序幕從農(nóng)民將因此獲得53，如果他保持2裝載機(jī)，而不是3。這個(gè)耗資3損失，因此在保持第三督導(dǎo)所需的費(fèi)用的一部分。無(wú)論是3美元，是1支付其中的牛的提出者有，如果他增加了第三次帶領(lǐng)他的羊群（其中它會(huì)是在牛的提出者是否可農(nóng)民對(duì)作物造成的損害）或是否它是1錢(qián)，他將已收到的，如果他不保持第三督導(dǎo)（這將是牛募集到農(nóng)民對(duì)作物造成的損害不承擔(dān)任何責(zé)任）的總和，不影響最終結(jié)果。在這兩種情況下$ 3是第三督導(dǎo)，與其他費(fèi)用一起被列入成本的一部分。大于，以將招致包括的$ 3損壞農(nóng)作物的額外成本，通過(guò)增加大小鬼從2至3養(yǎng)牛生產(chǎn)價(jià)值的增加是否，牛群的規(guī)模將是增加。否則，它不會(huì)。畜群的大小將是相同的牛募集是否是作物或造成的損失承擔(dān)責(zé)任。

它可能被認(rèn)為是武斷的假定出發(fā)點(diǎn)了3肉牛畜群。這是真實(shí)的。但農(nóng)民不希望要避免牛募集將無(wú)法造成的農(nóng)作物損失。例如，可誘導(dǎo)農(nóng)民支付每年最高支付不能超過(guò)9美元。擊劍的成本。和農(nóng)民只會(huì)愿意支付這筆如果它沒(méi)有減少他的收入水平，將導(dǎo)致他放棄這片土地特別是道種植。此外，農(nóng)民才會(huì)愿意支付這筆款項(xiàng)，如果他相信，在任何由他支付的情況下，牛募集保持畜群的大小是4個(gè)或更多的指導(dǎo)。讓我們假設(shè)是這種情況。那么，農(nóng)民將是愿意以支付高達(dá)3美元的牛的提出者是否會(huì)減少他的牛群3裝載機(jī)，6元如果牛群分別減少2裝載機(jī)，至8元，如果1轉(zhuǎn)向只被保持和上升到$9，如果養(yǎng)牛被遺棄。它將會(huì)看到，在起點(diǎn)的變化并沒(méi)有改變的金額將撥歸牛的序幕，如果他任何給定的金額減少了他的畜群規(guī)模。它是仍然真實(shí)，在牛的提出者可以接收從農(nóng)民1額外的$3，如果他同意減少他的牛群3裝載機(jī)2添加第三3美元表示的，將被破壞作物的價(jià)值引導(dǎo)到牛群。雖然部分農(nóng)民對(duì)不同的信仰，對(duì)大小牛群，牛募集將保持在他付款的情況下（是否正當(dāng)與否），可能會(huì)影響他可誘發(fā)支付的總支付，它是不正確的，這種不同的信仰，實(shí)際上將保持牛群牛募集規(guī)模上有任何的影響。這將是相同的，因?yàn)樗鼤?huì)是牛的序幕，如果不得不支付他的牛造成的損害，因?yàn)槭盏揭粋€(gè)給定的金額損失相當(dāng)于支付相同數(shù)額。

它可能會(huì)認(rèn)為這將支付的牛的序幕，以增加他的畜群以上的規(guī)模，他希望保持已經(jīng)取得了一次討價(jià)還價(jià)，以促使農(nóng)民作出更大的支付總額。這可能是真實(shí)的。它在本質(zhì)上是相似的農(nóng)民行動(dòng)（當(dāng)牛募集的損害賠償責(zé)任），在培養(yǎng)上，為土地了與牛募集的協(xié)議的結(jié)果，種植隨后將被拋棄（包括土地，在養(yǎng)牛的情況下不能種植）在所有。但是，這些演習(xí)是達(dá)成協(xié)議的預(yù)賽和不影響長(zhǎng)期均衡的位置，這是牛募集與否舉行的關(guān)于他的牛所帶來(lái)的農(nóng)作物損失負(fù)責(zé)。

它是要知道是否是因?yàn)闆](méi)有建立這種權(quán)利的初始劃定不可能有沒(méi)有市場(chǎng)交易，轉(zhuǎn)讓和重組造成的損害不承擔(dān)責(zé)任或損害商業(yè)。但最終的結(jié)果（產(chǎn)值最大化）是獨(dú)立的法律地位，如果定價(jià)體系被假定為無(wú)成本。

V.THE PROBLEM ILLUSTRATED ANEW

The harmful effects of the activities of a business can assume a wide variety of forms.An early English case concerned a building which, by obstructing currents of air, hindered the operation of a windmill.A recent case in Florida which cast a shadow on the cabana, swimming pool and sunbathing areas of a neighbouring hotel.The problem of straying cattle and the damaging of crops which was the subject of detailed examination in the two preceding sections, although it may have appeared to be rather a special case, is in fact but one example of a problem which arises in many different guises.To clarify the nature of my argument and to demonstrate its general applicability, I propose to illustrate it anew by reference to four actual cases.Let us first reconsider the case of Sturges v.Bridgman which I used as an illustration of the general problem In my article on “The Federal Communica-tions Commission.” In this case, a confectioner(in Wigmore Street)used two mortars and pestles in connection with his business(one had been in opera-tion in the same position for more than 60 years and the other for more than 26 years).A doctor then came to occupy neighbouring premises(in Wimpole Street).The confectioner’s machinery caused the doctor no harm until, eight years after he had first occupied the premises, he built a consulting room at the end of his garden right against the confectioner’s kitchen.It was then found that the noise and vibration caused by the confectioner’s machinery made it difficult for the doctor to use his new consulting room.“In particular...the noise prevented him from examining his patients by auscultation for diseases of the chest.He also found it impossible to engage with effect in any occupation which required thought and attention.” The doctor therefore brought a legal action to force the confectioner to stop using his machinery.The courts had lit-tle difficulty in granting the doctor the injunction he sought.“Individual cases of hardship may occur in the strict carrying out of the principle upon which we found our judgment, but the negation of the principle would lead even more to individual hardship, and would at the same time produce a prejudicial effect upon the development of land for residential purposes.”

The court’s decision established that the doctor had the right to prevent the confectioner from using his machinery.But, of course, it would have been possible to modify the arrangements envisaged in the legal ruling by means of a bargain between the parties.The doctor would have been willing to waive his right and allow the machinery to continue in operation if the confectioner would have paid him a sum of money which was greater than the loss of income which he would suffer from having to move to a more costly or less convenient location or from having to curtail his activities at this location or, as was suggested as a possibility, from having to build a separate wall which would deaden the noise and vibration.The confectioner would have been willing to do this if the amount he would have to pay the doctor was less than the fall in income he would suffer if he had to change his mode of operation at this location, abandon his operation or move his confectionery business to some other location.The solution of the problem depends essentially on whether the continued use of the machinery adds more to the confectioner’s income than it subtracts from doctor’s.But now consider the situation if the confectioner had won the case.The confectioner would then have had the right to continue operating his noise and vibration-generating machinery without having to pay anything to the doctor.The boot would have been on the other foot: the doctor would have had to pay the confectioner to induce him to stop using the machinery.If the doctor’s income would have fallen more through continuance of the use of this machinery than it added to the income of the confectioner, there would clearly be room for a bargain whereby the doctor paid the confectioner to stop using the machinery.That is to say, the circumstances in which it would not pay the confectioner to continue to use the machinery and to compensate the doctor for the losses that this would bring(if the doctor had the right to prevent the confectioner’s using his machinery)would be those in which it would be in the interest of the doctor to make a payment to the confectioner which would induce him to discontinue the use of the machinery(if the confectioner had the right to operate the machinery).The basic conditions are exactly the same in this case as they were in the example of the cattle which destroyed crops.With costless market transactions, the decision of the courts concerning liability for damage would be without effect on the allocation of resources.It was of course the view of the judges that they were affecting the working of the economic system-and in a desirable direction.Any other decision would have had “a prejudicial effect upon the development of land for residential purposes,” an argument which was elaborated by examining the example of a forge operating on a barren moor.which was later developed for residential purposes.The judges’ view that they were settling how the land was to be used would be true only in the case in which the costs of carrying out the necessary market transactions exceeded the gain which might be achieved by any rearrangement of rights.And it would be desirable to preserve the areas(Wimpole Street or the moor)for residential or professional use(by giving non-industrial users the right to stop the noise, vibration, smoke, etc., by injunction)only if the value of the additional residential facilities obtained was greater than the value of cakes or iron lost.But of this the judges seem to have been unaware.The reasoning employed by the courts in determining legal rights will often seem strange to an economist because many of the factors on which the decision turns are, to an economist, irrelevant.Because of this, situations which are, from an economic point of view, identical will be treated quite differently by the courts.The economic problem in all cases of harmful effects is how to maximise the value of production.In the case of Bass v.Gregory fresh air was drawn in through the well which facilitated the production of beer but foul air was expelled through the well which made life in the adjoining houses less pleasant.The economic problem was to decide which to choose: a lower cost of beer and worsened amenities in adjoining houses or a higher cost of beer and improved amenities.In deciding this question, the “doctrine of lost grant” is as relevant as the colour of the judge’s eyes.But it has to be remembered that the immediate question faced by the courts is not what shall be done by whom but who has the legal right to do what.It is always possible to modify by transactions on the market the initial legal delimitation of rights.And, of course, if such market transactions are costless, such a rearrangement of rights will always take place if it would lead to an increase in the value of production.五、存在問(wèn)題的再目錄

業(yè)務(wù)活動(dòng)的有害影響，可以承擔(dān)各種各樣的形式。早期的英國(guó)案例，涉及建筑，阻礙氣流，阻礙了風(fēng)車(chē)的運(yùn)作。在佛羅里達(dá)州的一個(gè)最近的案例涉及建筑的小屋投下了陰影，鄰近酒店的游泳池和日光浴地區(qū)。誤入牛和破壞性的作物，這是前兩個(gè)部分的詳細(xì)檢查，雖然它可能已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)，而成為一個(gè)特殊的情況的問(wèn)題，實(shí)際上是一個(gè)問(wèn)題，在許多不同的形式出現(xiàn)的一個(gè)例子。為了闡明我的論點(diǎn)的本質(zhì)，并展示其普遍適用性，我建議重新參考四個(gè)實(shí)際案例來(lái)說(shuō)明。

首先，讓我們重新斯特奇斯訴布里奇曼的情況下，我在我的文章“聯(lián)邦通信委員會(huì)?！痹谶@種情況下的一般問(wèn)題的說(shuō)明，糕點(diǎn)（Wigmore街道）使用了迫擊炮和杵在與他的業(yè)務(wù)（一直在歌劇中，60歲以上和其他在同一位置超過(guò)26年）的連接。醫(yī)生后來(lái)占據(jù)鄰近樓宇（在Wimpole街）。糕點(diǎn)機(jī)械醫(yī)生造成任何傷害，直到8年后，他第一次占領(lǐng)的前提下，他建立了一個(gè)在他對(duì)糕點(diǎn)的廚房花園年底診室。它然后被發(fā)現(xiàn)，糕點(diǎn)的機(jī)械噪聲和振動(dòng)造成難以醫(yī)生用他的新診室?！坝绕涫?。。噪音阻止他檢查他的病人聽(tīng)診胸部疾病。他還發(fā)現(xiàn)了它不可能與從事任何職業(yè)，這需要思想和注意力的效果?！耙虼耍t(yī)生帶來(lái)了法律的行動(dòng)，以迫使糕點(diǎn)停止使用他的機(jī)械。法院給予他尋求醫(yī)生的禁令點(diǎn)燃地幔困難。“在嚴(yán)格執(zhí)行的原則后，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)我們的判斷，個(gè)別情況下可能會(huì)發(fā)生困難，但這一原則的否定甚至?xí)?dǎo)致更多的個(gè)人困難，將在同一時(shí)間產(chǎn)生不利影響的發(fā)展后1土地作住宅用途。“

讓我們先來(lái)法院的判決確定，醫(yī)生的權(quán)利，以防止糕點(diǎn)師用他的機(jī)械。但是，當(dāng)然，這將有可能修改在法律裁決的安排設(shè)想通過(guò)各方之間的討價(jià)還價(jià)。醫(yī)生會(huì)愿意放棄他的權(quán)利，并讓機(jī)器繼續(xù)運(yùn)作，如果糕點(diǎn)師將付給他一筆錢(qián)，這是大于收入的損失，他將遭受不利影響或移動(dòng)到較為昂貴的不太方便的位置，或從他在這個(gè)位置，以減少活動(dòng)，或者是作為一種可能性的建議，從建立一個(gè)單獨(dú)的墻，這將緩和的噪聲和振動(dòng)。糕點(diǎn)會(huì)一直愿意這樣做，如果他將不得不支付醫(yī)生的金額小于收入下降，他將遭受如果他改變他的運(yùn)作模式，在這個(gè)位置放棄他的行動(dòng)或移動(dòng)他的糖果業(yè)務(wù)一些其他的位置。問(wèn)題的解決，根本上取決于是否繼續(xù)使用的機(jī)械增加了更多的糕點(diǎn)師的收入比從醫(yī)生的減去。但現(xiàn)在考慮的情況，如果糕點(diǎn)師曾贏(yíng)得了這場(chǎng)官司。糕點(diǎn)，然后將有權(quán)利繼續(xù)他的噪音和振動(dòng)產(chǎn)生的機(jī)械操作，而無(wú)需支付任何費(fèi)用醫(yī)生。引導(dǎo)已在另一只腳：醫(yī)生將不得不支付的糕點(diǎn)，以誘使他停止使用機(jī)器。如果醫(yī)生的收入將通過(guò)繼續(xù)使用這種機(jī)器比它添加到糕點(diǎn)的收入下降，顯然是有，據(jù)此醫(yī)生支付的糕點(diǎn)停止使用的機(jī)械討價(jià)還價(jià)的余地。也就是說(shuō)，的情況下，在其中它會(huì)不支付的糕點(diǎn)繼續(xù)使用機(jī)械和以彌補(bǔ)的損失，這會(huì)帶來(lái)醫(yī)生（如果醫(yī)生不得不以防止對(duì)糕點(diǎn)的用他的機(jī)器的權(quán)利）將是它會(huì)在醫(yī)生的利益作出支付的糕點(diǎn)，這將促使他停止使用的機(jī)器（如糕點(diǎn)有經(jīng)營(yíng)權(quán)的機(jī)械）。正是在這種情況下的基本條件相同，因?yàn)樗麄冊(cè)谂?，莊稼被毀的例子?；ㄥX(qián)的市場(chǎng)交易中，有關(guān)損害賠償責(zé)任的法院的決定將是沒(méi)有對(duì)資源分配的影響。這是當(dāng)然的法官認(rèn)為，他們影響的經(jīng)濟(jì)體系，在一個(gè)理想的方向工作。有任何其他決定“后，土地開(kāi)發(fā)作住宅用途1的不利影響，”這是一個(gè)貧瘠的荒野上通過(guò)檢查一個(gè)鐵匠鋪操作系統(tǒng)的例子闡述論點(diǎn)。后來(lái)發(fā)展為住宅用途。法官認(rèn)為，他們要使用的土地是如何被解決，將是真實(shí)的，只有在案件中，開(kāi)展必要的市場(chǎng)交易的成本超過(guò)可能被重排的任何權(quán)利方面所取得的收益。，這將是可取的，如果只保留價(jià)值的住宅或?qū)I(yè)領(lǐng)域（Wimpole街或沼地）（非工業(yè)用戶(hù)有權(quán)停止禁令的噪聲，振動(dòng)，煙霧等，通過(guò)）獲得額外的住宿設(shè)施是大于蛋糕或丟失的鐵的價(jià)值。但法官似乎已經(jīng)不知道。

在確定的法律權(quán)利由法院聘請(qǐng)的推理往往會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家似乎很奇怪，因?yàn)樵S多因素上決定輪流，一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家，不相干的。正因?yàn)槿绱耍@是的情況下，從經(jīng)濟(jì)角度來(lái)看，相同的將被視為完全不同的法院。在所有情況下的有害影響的經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題是如何最大限度地提高生產(chǎn)的價(jià)值。在巴斯訴格雷戈里新鮮空氣的情況下制定通過(guò)的好，這有利于生產(chǎn)的啤酒，但污濁的空氣，通過(guò)在毗鄰的房子不太愉快的生活以及開(kāi)除。經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題是決定選擇：啤酒更低的成本和惡化，毗鄰的房屋或設(shè)施的啤酒和改進(jìn)設(shè)施的成本較高。在決定這個(gè)問(wèn)題，“批丟失的教義”，是法官的眼睛顏色有關(guān)。但要記住，法院所面臨的切身問(wèn)題不應(yīng)當(dāng)由誰(shuí)來(lái)做什么，但誰(shuí)擁有合法權(quán)利做什么。它始終是可能的修改市場(chǎng)上交易的初始權(quán)利的法律劃界。當(dāng)然，如果這樣的市場(chǎng)交易是無(wú)成本，這樣的權(quán)重排總是會(huì)發(fā)生，如果它會(huì)導(dǎo)致增加產(chǎn)值。

VI.THE COST OF MARKET TRANSACTIONS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT

The argument has proceeded up to this point on the assumption(explicit in Sections III and IV and tacit in Section V)that there were no costs involved in carrying out market transactions.This is, of course, a very unrealistic assump-tion.In order to carry out a market transaction it is necessary to discover who it is that one wishes to deal with, to inform people that one wishes to deal and on what terms, to conduct negotiations leading up to a bargain, to draw up the contract, to undertake the inspection needed to make sure that the terms of the contract are being observed and so on.These operations are often extremely costly, sufficiently costly at any rate to prevent many transactions that would be carried out in a world in which the pricing system worked without cost.In earlier sections, when dealing with the problem of the rearrangement of legal rights through the market, it was argued that such a rearrangement would be made through the market whenever this would lead to an increase in the value of production.But this assumed costless market transactions.Once the costs of carrying out market transactions are taken into account it is clear that such a rearrangement of rights will only be undertaken when the increase in the value of production consequent upon the rearrangement is greater than the costs which would be involved in bringing it about.When it is less, the granting of an injunction(or the knowledge that it would be granted)or the liability to pay damages may result in an activity being discontinued(or may prevent its being started)which would be undertaken if market transactions were costless.In these conditions the initial delimitation of legal rights does have an effect on the efficiency with which the economic system operates.One arrangement of rights may bring about a greater value of production than any other.But unless this is the arrangement of rights established by the legal system, the costs of reaching the same result by altering and combining rights through the market may be so great that this optimal arrangement of rights, and the greater value of production which it would bring, may never be achieved.The part played by economic considerations in the process of delimiting legal rights will be discussed in the next section.In this section, I will take the initial delimitation of rights and the costs of carrying out market transactions as given.It is clear that an alternative form of economic organisation which could achieve the same result at less cost than would be incurred by using the market value of production to be raised.As I explained many years ago, the firm represents such an alternative to organising production through market transactions.Within the firm individual bargains between the various cooperating factors of production are eliminated and for a market transaction is substituted an administrative decision.The rearrangement of production then takes place without the need for bargains between the owners of the factors of production.A landowner who has control of a large tract of land may devote his land to various uses taking into account the effect that the interrelations of the various activities will have on the net return of the land, thus rendering unnecessary bargains between those undertaking the various activities.Owners of a large building or of several adjoining properties in a given area may act in much the same way.In effect, using our earlier terminology, the firm would acquire the legal rights of all the parties and the rearrangement of activities would not follow on a rearrangement of rights by contract, but as a result of an administrative decision as to how the rights should be used.It does not, of course, follow that the administrative costs of organizing a transaction through a firm are inevitably less than the costs of the market transactions which are superseded.But where contracts are peculiarly diffi-cult to draw up and an attempt to describe what the parties have agreed to do or not to do(e.g.the amount and kind of a smell or noise that they may make or will not make)would necessitate a lengthy and highly involved docu-ment, and, where, as is probable, a long-term contract would be desirable, it would be hardly surprising if the emergence of a firm or the extension of the activities of an existing firm was not the solution adopted on many occasions to deal with the problem of harmful effects.This solution would be adopted whenever the administrative costs of the firm were less than the costs of the market transactions that it supersedes and the gains which would result from the rearrangement of activities greater than the firm’s costs of organising them.I do not need to examine in great detail the character of this solution since I have explained what is involved in my earlier article.But the firm is not the only possible answer to this problem.The admin-istrative costs of organising transactions within the firm may also be high, and particularly so when many diverse activities are brought within the control of a single organisation.In the standard case of a smoke nuisance, which may affect a vast number of people engaged in a wide variety of activities, the adminis-trative costs might well be so high as to make any attempt to deal with the problem within the confines of a single firm impossible.An alternative solution is direct government regulation.Instead of instituting a legal system of rights which can be modified by transactions on the market, the government may im-pose regulations which state what people must or must not do and which have to be obeyed.Thus, the government(by statute or perhaps more likely through an administrative agency)may, to deal with the problem of smoke nuisance, used(e.g.that smoke preventing devices should be installed or that coal or oil should not be burned)or may confine certain types of business to certain districts(zoning regulations).The government is, in a sense, a superfirm(but of a very special kind)since it is able to influence the use of factors of production by administrative decision.But the ordinary firm is subject to cheeks in its operations because of the competition of other firms, which might administer the same activities at lower cost and also because there is always the alternative of market transactions as against organisation within the firm if the administrative costs become too great.The government is able, if it wishes, to avoid the market altogether, which a firm can never do.The firm has to make market agreements with the owners of the factors of production that it uses.Just as the government can conscript or seize property, so it can decree that factors of production should only be used in such-and-such a way.Such authoritarian methods save a lot of trouble(for those doing the organising).Furthermore, the government has at its disposal the police and the other law enforcement agencies to make sure that its regulations are carried out.It is clear that the government has powers which might enable it to get some things done at a lower cost than could a private organisation(or at any rate one without special governmental powers).But the governmental admin-istrative machine is not itself costless.It can, in fact, on occasion be extremely costly.Furthermore, there is no reason to suppose that the restrictive and zoning regulations, made by a fallible administration subject to political pres-sures and operating without any competitive check, will necessarily always be those which increase the efficiency with which the economic system operates.Furthermore, such general regulations which must apply to a wide variety of cases will be enforced in some cases in which they are clearly inappropriate.From these considerations it follows that direct governmental regulation will not necessarily give better results than leaving the problem to be solved by the market or the firm.But equally there is no reason why, on occasion, such governmental administrative regulation should not lead to an improvement in economic efficiency.This would seem particularly likely when, as is normally the case with the smoke nuisance, a large number of people are involved and in which therefore the costs of handling the problem through the market or the firm may be high.There is, of course, a further alternative which is to do nothing about the problem at all.And given that the costs involved in solving the problem by regulations issued by the governmental administrative machine will often be heavy(particularly if the costs are interpreted to include all the consequences which follow from the government engaging in this kind of activity), it will no doubt be commonly the case that the gain which would come from regulating the actions which give rise to the harmful effects will be less than the costs involved in government regulation.The discussion of the problem of harmful effects in this section(when the costs of market transactions are taken into account)is extremely inadequate.But at least it has made clear that the problem is one of choosing the appro-priate social arrangement for dealing with the harmful effects.All solutions have costs and there is no reason to suppose that government regulation is called for simply because the problem is not well handled by the market or the firm.Satisfactory views on policy can only come from a patient study of how, in practice, the market, firms and governments handle the problem of harmful effects.Economists need to study the work of the broker in bring-ing parties together, the effectiveness of restrictive covenants, the problems of the large-scale real-estate development company, the operation of government zoning and other regulating activities.It is my belief that economists, and policy-makers generally, have tended to over-estimate the advantages which come from governmental regulation.But this belief, even if justified, does not do more than suggest that government regulation should be curtailed.It does not tell us where the boundary line should be drawn.This, it seems to me, has to come from a detailed investigation of the actual results of handling the problem in different ways.But it would be unfortunate if this investigation were undertaken with the aid of a faulty economic analysis.The aim of this article is to indicate what the economic approach to the problem should be.六、考慮市場(chǎng)交易成本

參數(shù)已進(jìn)行到這一點(diǎn)（在第三節(jié)和第四節(jié)和第五節(jié)默契在明確）有開(kāi)展市場(chǎng)交易不涉及成本的假設(shè)。當(dāng)然，這是一個(gè)非常不現(xiàn)實(shí)的假設(shè)。為了進(jìn)行市場(chǎng)交易，這是必要的，發(fā)現(xiàn)它是一個(gè)愿望，處理，告知人有意愿來(lái)處理和在什么條件下，進(jìn)行討價(jià)還價(jià)的談判，起草合同，進(jìn)行必要的檢查，以確保合同條款等正在觀(guān)察。無(wú)論如何，以防止將進(jìn)行無(wú)成本定價(jià)體系工作的世界中，許多交易，這些操作往往非常昂貴，充分昂貴。

在前面的章節(jié)中，與重排，通過(guò)市場(chǎng)的合法權(quán)益的問(wèn)題進(jìn)行處理時(shí)，有人認(rèn)為，這種重排，將通過(guò)市場(chǎng)時(shí)，這將導(dǎo)致產(chǎn)值的增加。但這種假設(shè)不花錢(qián)的市場(chǎng)交易。一旦考慮到進(jìn)行市場(chǎng)交易的成本很顯然，這樣的權(quán)重排時(shí)，將只進(jìn)行重排后的生產(chǎn)值增加大于這將帶來(lái)約涉及的費(fèi)用。當(dāng)它是少，授予強(qiáng)制令（或?qū)⒈皇谟璧闹R(shí)）或支付損害賠償?shù)呢?zé)任，可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致被停止活動(dòng)的（或可能妨礙其正在啟動(dòng)），如果市場(chǎng)交易是無(wú)成本的，將進(jìn)行。在這種情況下，初步劃定的合法權(quán)利，也有經(jīng)濟(jì)體制與經(jīng)營(yíng)效率的影響。一個(gè)安排的權(quán)利，可能會(huì)帶來(lái)更大的價(jià)值比任何其他的生產(chǎn)。但除非這是規(guī)定的權(quán)利的法律制度安排，達(dá)到相同的結(jié)果，改變，并通過(guò)市場(chǎng)相結(jié)合的權(quán)利的成本可能是最佳的安排，這種權(quán)利和生產(chǎn)更大的價(jià)值，它會(huì)帶來(lái)如此巨大，可能永遠(yuǎn)無(wú)法實(shí)現(xiàn)。經(jīng)濟(jì)上的考慮在劃定的法律權(quán)利的過(guò)程中發(fā)揮的部分將在下一節(jié)中討論。在本節(jié)中，我將采取初步劃定的權(quán)利和進(jìn)行市場(chǎng)交易，給定的費(fèi)用。

這是另一種形式的經(jīng)濟(jì)組織可以以更低的成本實(shí)現(xiàn)相同的結(jié)果，將利用市場(chǎng)發(fā)生將使產(chǎn)值提高。正如我解釋了很多年前，該公司表示這種通過(guò)市場(chǎng)交易來(lái)組織生產(chǎn)的替代。在企業(yè)內(nèi)部生產(chǎn)要素之間的各種合作的個(gè)人討價(jià)還價(jià)被淘汰，市場(chǎng)交易取代行政決定。然后重新安排生產(chǎn)，而不需要對(duì)生產(chǎn)要素的所有者之間討價(jià)還價(jià)的地方。一個(gè)地主有一大片土地的控制，考慮各種用途的土地純收益的效果，各項(xiàng)活動(dòng)的相互關(guān)系，將有可能把自己的土地，從而使開(kāi)展的各項(xiàng)活動(dòng)之間的不必要的討價(jià)還價(jià)。大型建筑，或在某一領(lǐng)域的幾個(gè)毗鄰物業(yè)的業(yè)主可能在大致相同的方式行事。效果，在使用我們前面的術(shù)語(yǔ)，該公司將收購(gòu)所有各方和重排的活動(dòng)不會(huì)按照一個(gè)由合同權(quán)利的重排的合法權(quán)益，但作為一個(gè)行政決定的權(quán)利應(yīng)該如何使用。

當(dāng)然，它不遵循，通過(guò)企業(yè)組織交易的行政費(fèi)用是不可避免的比被取代的市場(chǎng)交易成本。但合同是獨(dú)有很難邪教組織制訂和試圖說(shuō)明什么各方都同意這樣做或不這樣做（如氣味或噪音，他們可能不會(huì)讓的數(shù)量和種類(lèi)）將須漫長(zhǎng)和高度參與的實(shí)況，并在那里，是可能的，長(zhǎng)期的合同將是可取的，這將是不足為奇的，如果出現(xiàn)公司或擴(kuò)建現(xiàn)有企業(yè)的活動(dòng)是不是解決問(wèn)題的方法通過(guò)多次處理有害影響的問(wèn)題。該解決方案將通過(guò)時(shí)，該公司的行政費(fèi)用不到的，它取代了市場(chǎng)交易的成本和收益，這將導(dǎo)致重排的活動(dòng)大于組織他們公司的成本。我不需要非常詳細(xì)的檢查，因?yàn)槲乙呀忉屵^(guò)什么是我以前的文章中涉及的這一解決方案的特點(diǎn)。

但該公司沒(méi)有這個(gè)問(wèn)題的唯一可能的答案。該公司籌辦事務(wù)內(nèi)的行政成本，也可能是高的，尤其是當(dāng)許多不同的活動(dòng)，在一個(gè)單一的組織控制。在煙霧滋擾的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的情況下，這可能會(huì)影響廣大的人在從事各種各樣的活動(dòng)，行政成本可能如此之高，使一個(gè)范圍內(nèi)來(lái)處理這個(gè)問(wèn)題的任何企圖單個(gè)企業(yè)是不可能的。另一種方法是政府直接調(diào)控。提起的權(quán)利的法律制度，這可以通過(guò)交易市場(chǎng)上的修改，而不是政府可能提高對(duì)法規(guī)，這說(shuō)明人們必須或不能做，哪些必須遵守。因此，政府（法規(guī)或者更可能通過(guò)行政機(jī)關(guān)），處理與一定的生產(chǎn)方法應(yīng)該或不應(yīng)該被用來(lái)（應(yīng)安裝防止設(shè)備的egthat煙霧或煙霧滋擾的問(wèn)題，法令煤或石油不應(yīng)該被燒毀）或某些地區(qū)區(qū)劃法規(guī)可能限制某些類(lèi)型的業(yè)務(wù)。

從某種意義上說(shuō)，政府是一個(gè)superfirm（但一個(gè)非常特殊的一種），因?yàn)樗悄軌蛲ㄟ^(guò)行政決定影響生產(chǎn)要素的使用。但普通的公司是在其他公司的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，這可能會(huì)以較低的成本管理同樣的活動(dòng)，也因?yàn)槠洳僮鞯哪橆a，因?yàn)榭偸怯刑娲袌?chǎng)交易，對(duì)組織在企業(yè)內(nèi)部，如果行政成本成為太大了。政府是可以的，如果它希望，以避免完全的市場(chǎng)，堅(jiān)決不能做。該公司擁有市場(chǎng)的協(xié)議，它使用的生產(chǎn)要素的所有者。正如政府可以征兵或扣押財(cái)產(chǎn)，所以它可以法令，生產(chǎn)要素只應(yīng)在和這樣一種方式使用。這種專(zhuān)制的方法節(jié)省了很多麻煩（那些做主辦）。此外，政府已在其處置的警察和其他執(zhí)法機(jī)構(gòu)，以確保其法規(guī)進(jìn)行。

很顯然，政府有可能使其能夠在較低的成本比私人組織（或在任何率沒(méi)有特殊的政府權(quán)力之一）做一些事情的權(quán)力。但政府的行政機(jī)本身并不是無(wú)成本的。事實(shí)上，它可以是上一次極其昂貴的。此外，也沒(méi)有理由認(rèn)為，限制和區(qū)劃法規(guī)，1犯錯(cuò)誤行政受到政治壓力措施和經(jīng)營(yíng)沒(méi)有任何競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力的檢查，一定會(huì)永遠(yuǎn)是那些提高效率與經(jīng)濟(jì)體制的運(yùn)作。此外，這樣的一般規(guī)定必須適用于種類(lèi)繁多的情況下將被強(qiáng)制在某些情況下，他們顯然是不合適的。從這些方面考慮，政府直接監(jiān)管不一定會(huì)提供更好的結(jié)果比離開(kāi)市場(chǎng)或企業(yè)要解決的問(wèn)題。但同樣沒(méi)有任何理由為什么，有時(shí)，這種政府的行政法規(guī)不應(yīng)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)效率的改善。這似乎特別容易時(shí)，通常是煙霧滋擾的情況下，大量的人參與和因此在處理的問(wèn)題，通過(guò)市場(chǎng)或公司的成本可能很高。

當(dāng)然，這是在所有有關(guān)問(wèn)題做了進(jìn)一步的替代。并給予解決的問(wèn)題，由政府行政機(jī)發(fā)出的規(guī)例所涉及的費(fèi)用往往是沉重的（特別是如果費(fèi)用被解釋為包括從政府從事這類(lèi)活動(dòng)的后續(xù)的一切后果），它不會(huì)無(wú)疑是通常的情況下，增益來(lái)調(diào)節(jié)而引起的有害影響的行動(dòng)將少于政府監(jiān)管所涉及的費(fèi)用。

在本節(jié)（當(dāng)市場(chǎng)交易成本的考慮）的有害影響的問(wèn)題的討論是非常不足。但它至少已明確表示，問(wèn)題是選擇合適的處理的有害影響的社會(huì)安排。所有的解決方案成本，并沒(méi)有任何理由假設(shè)政府監(jiān)管，干脆就叫市場(chǎng)或企業(yè)，因?yàn)檫@個(gè)問(wèn)題沒(méi)有得到很好的處理。令人滿(mǎn)意的政策意見(jiàn)只能來(lái)自病人的研究了如何在實(shí)踐中，市場(chǎng)，企業(yè)和政府處理的有害影響的問(wèn)題。經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家需要研究的經(jīng)紀(jì)人帶來(lái)的各方一起工作的限制性條款的效力，大型房地產(chǎn)開(kāi)發(fā)公司，政府區(qū)劃和其他規(guī)管活動(dòng)的運(yùn)作問(wèn)題。這是我的信念，經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家和決策者，都傾向于高估的優(yōu)勢(shì)，從政府監(jiān)管。但這樣的信念，即使有理，不會(huì)做多建議應(yīng)削減政府的監(jiān)管。它并沒(méi)有告訴我們應(yīng)制定邊界線(xiàn)。這一點(diǎn)，在我看來(lái)，有來(lái)自一個(gè)詳細(xì)的調(diào)查，以不同的方式處理問(wèn)題的實(shí)際效果。但它會(huì)是不幸的，如果這個(gè)調(diào)查是一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤的經(jīng)濟(jì)分析的援助承諾。這篇文章的目的是要表明，經(jīng)濟(jì)的解決問(wèn)題的方法應(yīng)該是什么。

VII.THE LEGAL DELIMITATION OF RIGHTS AND THE ECONOMIC

PROBLEM

The discussion in Section V not only served to illustrate the argument but also afforded a glimpse at the legal approach to the problem of harmful effects.The cases considered were all English but a similar selection of American cases could easily be made and the character of the reasoning would have been the same.Of course, if market transactions were costless, all that matters(questions of equity apart)is that the rights of the various parties should be well-defined and the results of legal actions easy to forecast.But as we have seen, the situation is quite different when market transactions are so costly as to make it difficult to change the arrangement of rights established by the law.In such cases, the courts directly influence economic activity.It would therefore seem desirable that the courts should understand the economic consequences of their decisions and should, insofar as this is possible without creating too much uncertainty about the legal position itself, take these consequences into account when making their decisions.Even when it is possible to change the legal delimitation of rights through market transactions, it is obviously desirable to reduce the need for such transactions and thus reduce the employment of resources in carrying them out.A thorough examination of the presuppositions of the courts in trying such cases would be of great interest but I have not been able to attempt it.Nevertheless it is clear from a cursory study that the courts have often recognized the economic implications of their decisions and are aware(as many economists are not)of the reciprocal nature of the problem.Furthermore, from time to time, they take these economic implications into account, along with other factors, in arriving at their decisions.The American writers on this subject refer to the question in a more explicit fashion than do the British.Thus, to quote Prosser on Torts, a person may make use of his own property or...conduct his own affairs at the expense of some harm to his neighbours.He may operate a factory whose noise and smoke cause some discomfort to others, so long as he keeps within reasonable bounds.It is only when his conduct is unreasonable,in the light of its utilitliy and the harm which results [italics added], that it becomes a nuisance....As it was said in an ancient case in regard to candle-making in a town,“Le utility del chose excusera le noisomeness del stink.”

The world must have factories, smelters, oil refineries, noisy ma-chinery and blasting, even at the expense of some inconvenience to those in the vicinity and the plaintiff may be required to accept some not unreasonable discomfort for the general good.The standard British writers do not state as explicitly as this that a comparison between the utility and harm produced is an element in deciding whether a harmful effect should be considered a nuisance.But similar views, if less strongly expressed, are to be found.The doctrine that the harmful effect must be substantial before the court will act is, no doubt, in part a reflection of the fact that there will almost always be some gain to offset the harm.And in the reports of individual cases, it is clear that the judges have had in mind what would be lost as well as what would be gained in deciding whether to grant an injunction or award damages.Thus, in refusing to prevent the destruction of a prospect by a new building, the judge stated: I know no general rule of common law, which...says, that building so as to stop another’s prospect is a nuisance.Was that the case, there could be no great towns;and I must grant injunctions to all the new buildings in this town...The problem which we face in dealing with actions which have harmful effects is not simply one of restraining those responsible for them.What has to be decided is whether the gain from preventing the harm is greater than the loss which would be suffered elsewhere as a result of stopping the action which produces the harm.In a world in which there are costs of rearranging the rights established by the legal system, the courts, in cases relating to nuisance, in effect, making a decision on the economic problem and determining how resources are to be employed.It was argued that the courts are conscious of this and that they often make, although not always in a very explicit fashion, a comparison between what would be gained and what lost by preventing actions which have harmful effects.But the delimitation of rights is also the result of statutory enactments.Here we also find evidence of an appreciation of the reciprocal nature of the problem.While statutory enactments add to the list of nuisances, action is also taken to legalize what would otherwise be nuisances under the common law.The kind of situation which economists are prone to consider as requiring corrective government action is, in fact, often the result of government action.Such action is not necessarily unwise.But there is a real danger that extensive government intervention in the economic system may lead to the protection of those responsible for harmful effects being carried too far.七、作者權(quán)利的法律界定及經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題

在第五節(jié)的討論不僅有助于說(shuō)明的論點(diǎn)，但也給予一瞥法律途徑的有害影響的問(wèn)題?？紤]案件都是英語(yǔ)，但類(lèi)似的選擇了美國(guó)的情況下可以很容易地和推理的性質(zhì)本來(lái)相同。當(dāng)然，如果市場(chǎng)交易是無(wú)成本，所有這些事項(xiàng)除了股權(quán)問(wèn)題是，各方的權(quán)利，應(yīng)該是定義和法律行動(dòng)的結(jié)果很容易預(yù)測(cè)的。但是，正如我們所看到的，情況是完全不同的市場(chǎng)交易時(shí)，是如此昂貴，使其難以改變法律規(guī)定的權(quán)利的安排。在這種情況下，法院直接影響經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng)。因此，這似乎是可取的，法院應(yīng)了解他們的決定的經(jīng)濟(jì)后果，只要這是可能的，沒(méi)有創(chuàng)造太多的法律地位本身的不確定性，應(yīng)考慮到這些后果時(shí)，他們的決定。即使它是可能改變法律劃定的權(quán)利，通過(guò)市場(chǎng)交易，這顯然是可取的，以減少此類(lèi)交易的需要，從而減少就業(yè)資源，在執(zhí)行。

一個(gè)前提，法院在這種情況下試圖徹底檢查，將是極大的興趣，但我一直無(wú)法嘗試。盡管如此，它是從一個(gè)粗略的研究清楚，法院經(jīng)常承認(rèn)他們的決定對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的影響，并意識(shí)到問(wèn)題的互惠性質(zhì)（如許多經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家都沒(méi)有）。此外，不時(shí)，他們考慮到這些經(jīng)濟(jì)的影響，加上其他因素，在到達(dá)他們的決定。對(duì)這一問(wèn)題的美國(guó)作家，是指比英國(guó)更明確的方式問(wèn)題。因此，引用普羅瑟侵權(quán)，可能使一個(gè)人使用自己的財(cái)產(chǎn)。。進(jìn)行自己的事情，在犧牲一些傷害他的鄰居。他可能操作的工廠(chǎng)，其噪音和煙霧，給他人造成一些不適，只要他保持在合理的范圍之內(nèi)。

世界必須有工廠(chǎng)，冶煉廠(chǎng)，煉油廠(chǎng)，嘈雜的馬奇內(nèi)里和爆破，甚至不惜犧牲一些不便，給那些在附近，原告可能會(huì)被要求接受一些不講理的不適，在總體上是好的。

標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的英國(guó)作家沒(méi)有明確說(shuō)明，產(chǎn)生的效用和傷害之間的比較是在決定是否應(yīng)被視為滋擾產(chǎn)生有害作用的元素。但類(lèi)似的看法，如果那么強(qiáng)烈的表達(dá)，都可以找到。該學(xué)說(shuō)的有害影響，法院將采取行動(dòng)之前，必須是實(shí)質(zhì)性的，是毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)的一部分，將有幾乎總是會(huì)有一些增益，以抵消傷害的事實(shí)反映。在個(gè)別情況的報(bào)告，很顯然，法官已經(jīng)在頭腦里將失去什么在決定是否授予強(qiáng)制令或判給損害賠償，以及將獲得什么。因此，在拒絕一個(gè)新的建設(shè)，以防止破壞的前景，法官說(shuō)：我知道沒(méi)有普通法的一般規(guī)則。。說(shuō)，該建筑物，以阻止他人的前景是造成滋擾。的情況下，不可能有偉大的城鎮(zhèn)，而我在這個(gè)鎮(zhèn)的所有新建筑物必須給予禁令。

我們?cè)谔幚懋a(chǎn)生有害影響的行動(dòng)所面臨的問(wèn)題是不是簡(jiǎn)單地抑制那些對(duì)他們負(fù)責(zé)。已決定是否從防止危害的增益大于將停止行動(dòng)而產(chǎn)生的危害結(jié)果作為其他地方遭受的損失。在這個(gè)世界上，其中有重新安排的法律制度規(guī)定的權(quán)利的費(fèi)用，法院，有關(guān)滋擾的案件，實(shí)際上，經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題上作出的決定，并確定資源是如何被聘用。有人認(rèn)為，法院都意識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)，他們往往在一個(gè)非常明確的時(shí)尚，什么將得到什么失去防止產(chǎn)生有害影響的行動(dòng)之間的比較，雖然并不總是。但劃定權(quán)利也是法定的成文法則的結(jié)果。在這里，我們也可以找到證據(jù)互惠性質(zhì)的問(wèn)題表示贊賞。雖然法定成文法加入的滋擾列表，還采取行動(dòng)合法化，否則將根據(jù)普通法的滋擾。什么樣的情況經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家很容易認(rèn)為需要糾正的政府行動(dòng)，事實(shí)上，往往是政府行為的結(jié)果。這種行動(dòng)并不一定是不明智的。但有一個(gè)真正的危險(xiǎn)，可能導(dǎo)致廣泛的政府干預(yù)經(jīng)濟(jì)體制來(lái)保護(hù)那些負(fù)責(zé)進(jìn)行太遠(yuǎn)的有害影響。