<P> Critics of planned economies argue that planners cannot detect consumer preferences, shortages, and surpluses with sufficient accuracy and therefore cannot efficiently co-ordinate production (in a market economy, a free price system is intended to serve this purpose). This difficulty was notably written about by economists Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, who referred to subtly distinct aspects of the problem as the "economic calculation problem" and "local knowledge problem" respectively . Whereas the former stressed the theoretical underpinnings of a market economy to subjective value theory while attacking the labor theory of value, the latter argued that the only way to satisfy individuals who have a constantly changing hierarchy of needs, and are the only ones to possess their particular individual's circumstances, is by allowing those with the most knowledge of their needs to have it in their power to use their resources in a competing marketplace to meet the needs of the most consumers, most efficiently . This phenomenon is recognized as spontaneous order . Additionally, misallocation of resources would naturally ensue by redirecting capital away from individuals with direct knowledge and circumventing it into markets where a coercive monopoly influences behavior, ignoring market signals . According to Tibor R. Machan, "Without a market in which allocations can be made in obedience to the law of supply and demand, it is difficult or impossible to funnel resources with respect to actual human preferences and goals ." </P> <P> Economist Robin Hahnel notes that, even if central planning overcame its inherent inhibitions of incentives and innovation, it would nevertheless be unable to maximize economic democracy and self - management, which he believes are concepts that are more intellectually coherent, consistent and just than mainstream notions of economic freedom . </P> <P> Says Hahnel, "Combined with a more democratic political system, and redone to closer approximate a best case version, centrally planned economies no doubt would have performed better . But they could never have delivered economic self - management, they would always have been slow to innovate as apathy and frustration took their inevitable toll, and they would always have been susceptible to growing inequities and inefficiencies as the effects of differential economic power grew . Under central planning neither planners, managers, nor workers had incentives to promote the social economic interest . Nor did impeding markets for final goods to the planning system enfranchise consumers in meaningful ways . But central planning would have been incompatible with economic democracy even if it had overcome its information and incentive liabilities . And the truth is that it survived as long as it did only because it was propped up by unprecedented totalitarian political power ." </P> <P> Studies of Eastern European planned economies in the 1950s and 1960s by both American and Eastern European economists found that, contrary to the expectations of both groups, they showed greater fluctuations in output than market economies during the same period . </P>

Who owns the land and the capital in a centrally planned economy
find me the text answering this question