Money and the emergence of knowledge in society

This paper deals with money’s epistemic relevance in society. Money presents theoretical difficulties for neoclassical economics, which treats it as a cost-reducing tool, leading to a socially neutral, aseptic view on money. Drawing from complexity and social theory I provide a socio-epistemic rationalization for money’s irreplaceable role. Building upon Ingham’s Money Is a Social Relation, I argue that money generates a new orderly system of complex social relations that in turn engenders knowledge as an emergent social and ontological phenomenon irreducible to the fragmented knowledge held by members of society. I show that ultimately money cannot be separated from economic knowledge and market rationality. This paper provides sociological and ontological accounts for the emergence of knowledge crucial to coordinate societies, thus extending recent explorations of the ontology of money.     

Lachmann and the wilderness: On Lachmann's radical subjectivism

Abstract

This paper deals with the question why in the 1940s and 1950s Ludwig Lachmann (1906–1990) failed to revive Austrian economics. Lake Keynes and Hayek, Lachmann pointed out that expectations, and hence knowledge, are important determinants of (cyclical fluctuations in) investment and economic activity. He thereby emphasized that the process of knowledge acquisition is indeterminate and open‐ended. This indeterminateness is difficult to reconcile with neoclassical attempts to provide economics with internally consistent microfoundations. This fundamental difference between his and the neoclassical research agenda explains Lachmann's failure to revive Austrian economics.     

‘Anecdotal myths’: Tinbergen's influence on Harrod's growth theory

Abstract

In the history of economic theory, Harrod's transition from the explanation of business cycles in An Essay on the Trade Cycle (1936) to his well‐known growth theory in ‘An essay in dynamic theory’ (1939) has always been surrounded by some degree of speculation. One of the topics in that area of speculation concerns the (degree of) influence exerted by Tinbergen on the development of Harrod's growth theory during the 1936–9 period.

This paper argues that Tinbergen's influence on Harrod's work mainly took place on formal, mathematical, grounds, leaving methodological matters untouched. This matter is of some importance in understanding the success of what was initially considered by others as a ‘dynamic’ extension of the Keynesian research programme and later evolved, through the work of Tinbergen and Solow, into a neoclassical growth theory.     

Wealth accumulation and economic progress

In an evolutionary dynamic economic theory the accumulation of durable goods (i.e., wealth) is a key feature. Here we show that the wealth of individual economic agents can be measured by the progress function (PF). PF is a function of goods and money under straightforward assumptions, notably the ‘no-loss’ rule for transactions. We derive explicit formulae for wealth from the PF. We also show how the compatibility of the PF and the neoclassical economics deriving the conventional utility functions from the PF.     

Growth,environment, and culture—encompassing competing ideologies in one ‘new growth’ model

The debate about growth and the environment is fragmented due to ideological differences. Mainstream neoclassical and environmental economists tend to ignore deeper worries about long-term growth and nature. I show how competing positions can be interpreted within a single unifying framework. The interpretative tool is cultural theory, whereas the framework is a Schumpeterian growth model including environmentally oriented research in addition to ‘ordinary’ research. The two diagonals of cultural theory belong to economists and skeptics, respectively. The differences along the diagonals are about facts; for instance, economists disagree about the extent to which environmentally oriented research can mitigate the effects of economic growth. These differences are reflected in choice of parameter values. The key difference between the diagonals is in the choice of objective function—should we be maximizing consumption or ‘nature’? The model will not resolve the debate, but it does add clarity, pinning down differences and indicating questions for research. A neoclassical model may encompass problems deeper than resource use and pollution, and values other than those of the consumer.     

Some Misunderstood Aspects of the Final Chapter of Keynes’s General Theory

ABSTRACT

Some seriously misunderstood issues arise in three paragraphs in the last chapter of Keynes’s General Theory concerning the relationship between his theory and orthodox theory. That these passages permit a form of theoretical reconciliation is a view shared by prominent commentators of opposing persuasions. Joan Robinson and John Eatwell strongly criticised Keynes for inconsistency and for opening the door to neoclassical elements that undermine his theorising, while Paul Samuelson made Keynes’s comments the foundation of his textbook neoclassical synthesis. The reconciliation view, however, is based on hasty non-contextual readings and is mistaken. More careful analysis leads to three conclusions: neither internal inconsistency nor neoclassical appeasement exists; Keynes’s paragraphs are aligned with the theoretical positions previously advanced in the General Theory; and what is actually deployed is a complementarity view relating his macro-theory to one particular part of orthodox micro-theory. Rejecting the dominant view, however, does not remove the issue of the absence in Keynes’s work of an adequately exposited micro-theory to accompany his macro-theory.     

On the role of domestic and international financial cyclical factors in driving economic growth

ABSTRACT

We investigate the effects of (domestic and international) financial cyclical factors on the US business cycle over the period 1890–2013 using an augmented stochastic version of the neoclassical growth model. In our setting, financial factors enter as determinants of the total factor productivity cyclical pattern. By means of static and dynamic estimations we find that (i) the inclusion of financial cyclical factors improves the model’s performance; (ii) the sensitivity of economic growth to financial factors is time-varying; (iii) domestic financial factors have a key role in explaining short-run output fluctuations only in the first half of the 20th century; (iv) US business cycle fluctuations have been mainly driven by global financial factors (i.e., financial integration) over the last three decades.

JEL CODES: O40, E32, C32     

Money and the ‘Level Playing Field’: The Epistemic Problem of European Financial Market Integration

ABSTRACT

Financial market integration processes in the European Union (EU) are characterised by an epistemic problem of economic theory. This problem encompasses what ‘the market’ is, how it is to be ‘integrated’, and the nature and role of ‘money’ as infrastructure of the fully integrated market. The EU’s legal framework has imported this epistemic problem along with the competitive conception of the market as described in economic theory – as a ‘level playing field’ for private exchange, under free, fair and ideally unrestrained competition. It manifests itself in European financial market integration processes, as exemplified in the article, via two otherwise disconnected areas of European Central Bank (ECB) activity: (a) the provision of central bank credit for the purpose of financial transaction settlement in the Eurozone; and (b) the conduct of ordinary monetary policy in the Eurozone. While the problem can be stabilised through legal, technical and other means, it remains latent, and may manifest itself again in unexpected ways, as happened in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. Thus, contrary to ideologies that are widely understood as more or less coherent systems of doctrines, epistemic problems are characterised by specific tensions, contradictions and conceptual uncertainties.     

Economic importance and statistical significance: Guidelines for communicating empirical research

Abstract

A critical objective for many empirical studies is a thorough evaluation of both substantive importance and statistical significance. Feminist economists have critiqued neoclassical economics studies for an excessive focus on statistical machinery at the expense of substantive issues. Drawing from the ongoing debate about the rhetoric of economic inquiry and significance tests, this paper examines approaches for presenting empirical results effectively to ensure that the analysis is accurate, meaningful, and relevant for the conceptual and empirical context. To that end, it demonstrates several measurement issues that affect the interpretation of economic significance and are commonly overlooked in empirical studies. This paper provides guidelines for clearly communicating two distinct aspects of “significance” in empirical research, using prose, tables, and charts based on OLS, logit, and probit regression results. These guidelines are illustrated with samples of ineffective writing annotated to show weaknesses, followed by concrete examples and explanations of improved presentation.     

Economic Calculation: Private Property or Several Control?

Abstract

As the centenary of the 1917 Russian revolution approaches, it is worth reviewing the past 100 years’ discussion amongst economists on the possibility—or otherwise—of economic planning under socialism. The socialist calculation debate is of fundamental importance, not merely as a specialist application of economic ideas, but as an investigation of the foundations of economic activity. Every economic action is premised upon calculation, every choice depends upon an assessment of the costs and benefits of each alternative between which the agent must choose. The view of that choice and its attendant calculation is constitutive of the schools of thought—Marxian, neoclassical and Austrian—which have contributed to the debate. An understanding of the calculation debate is therefore required to understand how these paradigms stand in relation to each other. This article addresses one aspect of that debate—the claim by Austrian economists that socialism is impossible because the absence of private property in the means of production precludes economic calculation. The article suggests that several control rather than private property is required for economic calculation, and that several control is consistent with public ownership of the means of production. The Austrian argument on this point, therefore, is without force.     

Imperfect Information and Opportunism

Information is a scarce resource. It is inherently available only in a limited form to decision-makers. Limited or imperfect information is caused by uncertainty — both ontologic and epistemic, limitations in cognitive capabilities or bounded rationality, hidden information, and information asymmetries. This has fundamental implications for the manner in which the self-interested behavior of agents will manifest itself. The article argues that in the context of imperfect information, self-interest can function in a manner quite different from what standard approaches assume. This has been demonstrated by the recent financial crisis. However, there has been limited consideration in mainstream models, both of the neoclassical and institutional type, as to what the exact nature of self-interestedness is, and how this affects the market behavior of agents. The nature of self-interest, therefore, needs to be modeled explicitly to improve the explanatory power of economic theories.     

Crusoe,Friday and the Raced Market Frame of Orthodox Economics Textbooks

ABSTRACT

‘Crusoe’ and ‘Friday’ signifiers necessarily evoke a world of racialised hierarchies. Economics textbooks are perhaps the sole remaining medium to simply wish away their resulting relations of power. These are the teaching aids that inspire students analytically to think of markets as pristine economic institutions and persuade them politically that they should want to will such institutions into being. Yet they all-too-often rely on the pedagogical device of the so-called Robinson Crusoe Economy, where the main characters from Defoe’s most famous novel are required to instinctively recognise their equality within voluntary contracting agreements so that each can act as the neoclassical homo economicus. In other words, economists’ Crusoe and Friday figures must behave antithetically to what has historically been implied by the ‘Crusoe’ and ‘Friday’ signifiers. But how can this be so, given how commonplace it was when Defoe’s characters were first introduced into economic theory in the 1850s to justify white settler colonialism on the grounds that ‘savage’ societies lacked the capacity to be self-governing? The raced market frame that emerged in practice from this assumption continues to be reproduced uncritically today by Crusoe’s and Friday’s presence in the textbook explanation of the most basic model of market exchange.     

Competing Models of Socially Constructed Economic Man: Differentiating Defoe's Crusoe from the Robinson of Neoclassical Economics

Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe has seldom been read as an explicitly political text. When it has, it appears that the central character was designed to warn the early eighteenth-century reader against political challenges to the existing economic order. Insofar as Defoe's Crusoe stands for ‘economic man’, he is a reflection of historically produced assumptions about the need for social conformity, not the embodiment of any genuinely essential economic characteristics. This insight is used to compare Defoe's conception of economic man with that of the neoclassical Robinson Crusoe economy. On the most important of the ostensibly generic principles espoused by neoclassical theorists, their ‘Robinson’ has no parallels with Defoe's Crusoe. Despite the shared name, two quite distinct social constructions serve two equally distinct pedagogical purposes. Defoe's Crusoe extols the virtues of passive middle-class sobriety for effective social organisation; the neoclassical Robinson champions the establishment of markets for the sake of productive efficiency.     

The Economics of Pensions: A non-conventional approach

This paper examines two alternative pension systems, pay-as-you-go (PAYGS) and the capitalisation system (CS) in the light of alternative economic theories. It starts from a critical discussion of the insurance-fiction model of PAYGS proposed by Samuelson in 1958. The pros and cons of that model are illustrated by taking into consideration the non-orthodox views of Keynes, Lerner, Pechman, de Finetti and Eisner. Next, the paper investigates the relationship between CS and the marginalist capital theory. It is shown that, interpreted in a neoclassical framework, CS presents endogenous mechanisms of adjustment to demographic shocks. The problems of the transition between PAYGS and CS are then examined. The paper then discusses some main features of the current US policy debates on the Social Security system. Finally, the alleged advantages of a wider adoption of CS are criticised in the light of the Keynesian theory of effective demand reinforced by the Sraffian criticism of neoclassical capital theory.     

Entrepreneurship and regional growth: an evolutionary interpretation

While the neoclassical growth theory considered economic growth as a process of mere accumulation of production capital, the endogenous growth theory shifted the lens to the importance of knowledge in the production process and its potential to create spillovers. We argue in this paper that there is a gap between knowledge and exploitable knowledge or economic knowledge. Economic knowledge emerges from a selection process across the generally available body of knowledge, actively driven by economic agents. This paper suggests that entrepreneurship is an important mechanism in driving that selection process hence in creating diversity of knowledge, which in turn serves as a mechanism facilitating the spillover of knowledge. We provide empirical evidence that regions with higher levels of entrepreneurship indeed exhibit stronger growth in labor productivity.JEL Classification: M13, O32, O47 Correspondence to: David B. AudretschWe are grateful to the ZEW in Mannheim for research support and to the German Science Foundation (DFG) for financial support under research grant number STA 169/10-2. We are indebted to two anonymous referees and the editor of the special issue for their helpful comments.     

Social Economics and Evolutionary Institutionalism Today

This paper discusses theoretical and methodological elements that constitute social economics. It also considers those elements for evolutionary (Veblenian) institutional economics. It investigates how these “heterodoxies” may further converge. Such convergence would probably not trigger a complete unification, but lead to a broadly defined common research program and a strategy for joint “heterodox” survival, in face of the ranking game of the neoclassical “mainstream” and of the dominant powers supporting it as the discipline providing ideological legitimization. A common denominator of “heterodoxies” in terms of real-world orientation, direct interdependency and interaction of agents (social decision situations), appropriate complexity, and the treatment of values is drafted. Theoretical concepts discussed include complex and open systems, individual agency, institutions, embeddedness, networks, social reform, and process orientation. Formal methodological developments considered are complex modeling, game theory, or computer simulations. We arrive at a more formal common basis, which we term socio-economics. We also consider the relations of evolution and institutions, the institutional dichotomy, and the theory of institutional change. The monism of the “market” of the “mainstream” turns out to dissolve into the institutional diversity of real-world network forms, which helps explaining real-world forms of markets, hierarchies, or spatial clusters. Focuses of “heterodox” convergence will have to be the related “microfoundations” and “macrofoundations” projects, integrating an interdisciplinary “naturalistic” approach to genetic-cultural co-evolution of cooperation, and social reform. While modern socio-economics makes “heterodoxies” leading in economic research, their future still appears open between ideological cleansing and extinction through the mainstream, and proactive paradigmatic pluralism.     

Market process(es) and (un)knowledge

By extending an underdeveloped idea of Lachmann, I show that the Austrian theory of the market process à la Kirzner is unable to explain the diversity of market processes because it neglects the imperfect inter-market mobility of factors of production. I show that by taking into account the imperfect mobility of capital equipment and the associated reshuffling costs, it is possible to formulate a set of empirically testable implications about the unfolding of the market process. Furthermore, I show that reshuffling costs shape the context in which the learning process takes place and that the epistemic assumption of structural opacity on which the Austrian theory of the market process relies is not incompatible with the epistemics assumption of structural transparency of neoclassical economics. These epistemic assumptions can be seen as the two poles of a “knowledge spectrum”, from potential omniscience to sheer ignorance.     

ASSESSING THE RELATIVE IMPACTS OF ECONOMIC EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIP: AN APPLICATION OF THE HARZING DATABASE

Despite the rising prominence of economic education scholarship, little work has been done to document how economic education scholarship is faring in the academic world. Unlike prior research in this genre, this study assesses the relative impacts of economic education scholarship by examining published research in (strictly) economic education journals. In order to do so, we use the Harzing database of citations to articles published in (strictly) economic education journals from 1990 to the present. Supporting some of the measures found in prior research, we find that the Journal of Economic Education (JEE) is unambiguously the dominant source of influential scholarship in the field of economic education. Interestingly, the JEE's closest competitors among active economic education journals are the International Review of Economics Education and Computers in Higher Education Economics Research, both of which are published under the auspices of the Economics Network, which is located in the UK. Following these two journals in our ranking is the Journal of Economics and Finance Education, a relatively new journal launch.     

Tax Incidence in a Model with Efficiency Wages and Unemployment

Abstract

The purpose of the present paper is to examine the effects of taxation on income distribution in a model with efficiency wages and involuntary unemployment. Central to our efficiency-wage model is the hypothesis that firms set wages above market-clearing levels, whenever the productivity of labor depends on the real wage paid by the firm, and unemployment. Within a two sector general equilibrium model we study the incidence of factor and commodity taxes on income distribution, and unemployment. Our findings differ substantially from those derived by the traditional neoclassical analysis, originally developed by Harberger, and as it has been extended by several authors.     

The diversity of models as a means to better explanations in economics

ABSTRACT

In Economics Rules, Rodrik [(2015). Economics rules: Why economics works, when it fails, and how to tell the difference. Oxford: Oxford University Press] argues that what makes economics powerful despite the limitations of each and every model is its diversity of models. Rodrik suggests that the diversity of models in economics improves its explanatory capacities, but he does not fully explain how. I offer a clearer picture of how models relate to explanations of particular economic facts or events, and suggest that the diversity of models is a means to better economic explanations.