تحلیل تطبیقی از نظریه‌های اقتصاد نهادی: سنت اقتصادی وبلن، کامنز و میچل

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

دکترا اقتصاد دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

اقتصاد نهادگرا یکی از سنت‌های مهم اقتصادی است که به خاطر مطالعات خط‌شکنانه بنیانگذاران خود و به واسطه شناسایی حفره‌ها و خلأهای فلسفی و نظری اقتصاد اُرتُدوکس، نه تنها سنت جریان اصلی علم اقتصاد را به چالش کشید بلکه افق‌های تازه‌ای را بر روی این حوزه از معرفت بشری گشود.
از وبلن، کامنز و میچل عموماً به عنوان اصلی‌ترین بنیانگذاران اقتصاد نهادگرا یاد می‌شود. کسانی که در اوایل قرن بیستم با تلاش‌های فلسفی و نظری خود رویکرد نهادگرایی را پایه‌گذاری کردند. نظر به اهمیت کارهای علمی این افراد در علم اقتصاد در این مقاله تلاش خواهد شد که برخی از مهم‌ترین دستاوردهای علمی آنها مورد تامل و بررسی قرارگیرد. البته، این کار در دو سطح انجام خواهد شد. در ابتدا، اندیشه‌های این سه اقتصاددان به شکلی مجزا مورد توجه و بررسی قرار خواهد گرفت و برخی از مهمترین اجزای تشکیل دهنده آراء و اندیشه‌های آنها واکاوی خواهد شد. در ادامه، به واسطه استقلال نسبی این سه اندیشمند برجسته، به مقایسه و تحلیل تطبیقی ایده‌ها و تفکرات آنها خواهیم پرداخت تا از این طریق برخی از شباهت‌ها و تفاوت‌های آن‌ها را مشخص سازیم.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparative Analysis of Institutional Theories: Economic Traditions of Veblen, Commons and Mitchell

نویسنده [English]

  • Mahmoud Mashhadi Ahmad
Assistant Professor of Economics, University of Tehran
چکیده [English]

Institutional economics is one of the most important economic traditions that not only challenged the mainstream economics but also opened up new horizons in the domain of economic knowledge by identifying the philosophical and theoretical outlets and gaps of orthodox economics through its path-breaking studies.
Veblen, Commons and Mitchell are generally cited as the main founders of institutional economics. Those who in the early twentieth century established their institutional approach with their huge philosophical and theoretical efforts. Considering the importance of their scientific work in economics,, this article will attempt to reflect on some of their most important scientific achievements. Of course, this will be done on two levels. First, the ideas of these three economists will be discussed separately, and some of the most important components of their ideas will be analyzed. In the following, and because of the relative independence of these three prominent thinkers, we will compare their thoughts and ideas in order to identify some of their similarities and differences.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • "Institutional Economics"
  • "Veblen"
  • "Commons"
  • "Mitchell"
وبلن، تورستین، (1383)، نظریه طبقه تن­آسا، ترجمه فرهنگ ارشاد، نشر نی.
Ayres, C. E. (1951), The Co-ordinates of Institutionalism, The American Economic Review, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 47-55.
Biddle, J. E. (1998), "Wesley Clair Mitchell", in The Hanbook of Economic Methodology, edited by: J. B. Davis, D. W. Hands and U. Maki, Edward Elgar publishing Limited & Lansdown Place.
Boulding, K. E. (1957), “A New Look at Institutionalism” The American Economic Review, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp.1-12.
Burns, A. F. & W. C. Mitchell (1947), Measuring Business Cycles, New York, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Coats, A. W. (1954), “The Influnce of Veblen Methodology” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 62, No. 6, pp. 529-537.
Commons, J. R. (1924), the Legal Foundation of Capitalism, Macmillan.
Commons, J. R. (1931), ” Institutional Economics”, American Economic Review, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 648-657.
Commons, J. R. (1934), Institutional Economics, the Macmillan Company.
Gruchy, Allan G. (1940), “John R. Commons’ Concept of Twentieth-century Economics” The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 48, No.6, pp.823-850.
Gruchy, Allan G. (1947), Modern Economic Thought: The American Contribution, New York.
Gruchy, Allan G. (1957), “A New Look at Institutionalism: Discussion” The American Economic Review, Vol. 47, No.2, pp.13-15.
Gruchy, Allan G. (1958), "The Influence of Veblen on Mid-Century Institutionalism", The American Economic Review, Vol. 48, No., 2, Papers and Proceedings of the seventieth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, pp.11-20.
Hamilton, Walton H. (1919), " The Institutional Approach to Economic Theory", The American Economic Review,Vol.9, No.1,Supplement, Papers and proceedings of the Thirty Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, pp.309 _ 318.
Harris, A. L. (1932) “Types of Institutionalism” The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 40, No. 6, pp. 721-749.
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. (2003), "Darwinism and Institutional Economics”, Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. XXXVII, No.1.
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. (2004), “the Evolution of Institutional Economics; Agency, Structure and Darwinism in American Institutionalism” Routledge.
Lawson, Clive (1996) ‘Holism and Collectivism in the Work of J. R. Commons’, Journal of Economic Issues, 30(4), December, pp. 967–84.
Lowe, Adolph, (1980), “What Is Evolutionary Economics?” Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. XIV, No. 2, June.
Mitchell, Wesley C. (1910a), "The Rationality of Economic Activity: I", the Journal of Political Economy, Vol.18, No. 3, pp. 197-216.
Mitchell, Wesley C. (1910b), "The Rationality of Economic Activity: II", the Journal of Political Economy, Vol.18, No.3, pp. 197-216.
Mitchell, W. C. (1913), Business Cycles, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Mitchell, Wesley C. (1922) “The Crisis of 1920 and the Problem of Controlling Business Cycles”, American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), 12(1), March, pp. 20–32.
Mitchell, W. C. (1924), “Commons on the Legal Foundations of Capitalism” The American Economic Review, Vol. 14, No. 2, 240-53.
Mitchell, Wesley C. (1925), "Quantitative Analysis in Economic Theory", the American Economic Review, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 1-12.
 Mitchell, W. C. (1927), Business Cycles: the Problem and its Setting, New York, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Mitchell, Wesley C. (1944), "Facts and values in Economics", The Journal of philosophy, Vol. 41, No. 8, pp. 212-219.
Potts, Jason (2003), "Evolutionary Economic", Policy, Vol. 19, No.1.
Ramstad, Y. (1986), "A Pragmatist's Quest for Holistic Knowledge: The Scientific
Methodology of John R. Commons." Journal of Economic Issues 20:1067-1105.
Rutherford, Malcolm H. (1983), ”J. R. commons’ Institutional Economics”, Journal of Economic Issues, 17(3), September, pp. 721–44.
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1898), "Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science?” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol.12, No. 4, 373-397.
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1899) the theory of leisure class: an economic study in the evolution institutions, (New York: Macmillan).
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1904), the Theory of Business Enterprise, NeW York.
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1909), "the Limitation of Marginal Utility" the Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 17, No. 9, pp. 620-636.
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1914), The Instinct of Workmanship and The State of The industrial Arts, New York, Macmillan.
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1919a) the Place of Science in Modern Civilization and Other Essays. (New York: Huebsch).
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1919b), the Vested Interests and the Common Man, New York, Huebsch.
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1921), the Engineers and the Price System, New York.
Veblen, Thorstein B. (1923) Absentee Ownership and Business Enterprise in Recent Times, (New York: Huebsch).
Williamson, O. E. (2000), “The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XXXVIII, pp. 595–613.
Yonay, Y. P. (1998), the Struggle over the Soul of Economics: Institutionalist and Neoclassical Economists in America between the Wars, PrincetonUniversity Press.
Zingler, E. K. (1974) “Veblen vs. Commons: A Comparative Evaluation”, Kyklos, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 32-44.