If I was the construction worker I would get tools such as “ pickaxe, chisels, granite hammers, dolerite, and other stone tools to help me brake and shape things. Then I will bring a will barrow to help move have objects around the place.
Answer:
Private parties can negotiate to an efficient solution in the presence of externalities if the <u>transaction costs</u> is (are) relatively low.
<u>Potential way to internalise externality </u>: Including negative externality price in party tickets & using it for - better sound development , compensating residents for a negative effect to them
Explanation:
Coase Theorem states that two parties can bargain & reach at a socially efficient outcome, internalising negative externality impact - if the transaction cost is low.
Eg : A neighbouring farm & ranch, where Ranch's cattle wander & destroy farm's crops. It would be efficient to solution to draw a fence around the farm, contributed by the rancher also
In this case : Noise negative externality can be internalised by :
- Including the externality valuation as increased price in the party tickets
- Using the surplus collected money to internalise externality - for :
- Noise solving ways, eg headphones dj & sound proof venue development
- Compensating nearby locality for the adverse effect on them
Answer:
c. drive-reduction theory.
Explanation:
Based on the information provided within the question it can be said that this motivation can best be explained by the drive-reduction theory. This is a theory developed by Clark Hull in 1943 that states that focuses on the connection that exists between motivation and the individuals biological needs or drives.
1. Major organizations are making changes based upon climate <span>considerations.
2. </span>Companies growth will not be directly or indirectly affected be <span>environmental regulations and restrictions.
3. </span><span>Companies will have little choice but to deal with climate change issues.
4. </span>Consumers expect companies to incorporate “sustainable” operational practices.
Answer:
Inductive reasoning
Explanation:
Inductive reasoning results as an initial inquiry is present on the research, thereby a method of reasoning with premises that partially show some evidence for an eventual conclusion.
Often inductive reasoning is contrasted to deductive reasoning:
The deductive reasoning departs from an argument considered certain, while on inductive reasoning the argument may turn likely for the evidence that has been observed so far.
In social science, one way of engaging in inductive reasoning is by making ourselves questions about something we have only in part observed, then we construct a series of questions that will construct our hypothesis, and this hypothesis will either turn to be true or false, if it turns false an alternative hypothesis should be included.
<em>Sometimes inductive reasoning is called </em><u><em>"Bottom-up reasoning " for it goes from the particular observations to general conclusions.</em></u>
<em>We obtain general principles for phenomena through observation, however, inductive reasoning is always based on specific instances and thus narrowed, sometimes leading to review or reconsider weak arguments.</em>
