Veblen’s Two Types of Instinct and the Cognitive Foundations of Evolutionary-Institutional Economics

In this article, I provide a detailed examination of Thorstein Veblen’s conception of instincts, what he believed were the “prime movers in human behavior.” I outline the meaning of his division of instincts into simple and complex forms, and also document his account of their operational function and evolutionary origins. I then evaluate this understanding in relation to the new field of evolutionary psychology, and demonstrate how Veblen conceived of these instincts as interacting with habits and institutions. Finally, I illustrate one method of how the bio-cognitive level of behavioral reality could be integrated with the socio-institutional level of behavioral reality, and how an intermediate-interactive level between these two could have been generated. By doing so, I emphasize the need for scientifically accurate cognitive foundations to evolutionary-institutional economics (EIE)     

The Social Psychological Underpinnings of Commons’s Institutional Economics: The Significance of Dewey’s Human Nature and Conduct

The institutional environment of science differs across countries. Its particularities have an impact on productivity of scientific enterprise in terms of both research and teaching. Reform of the system of higher education occupies an important place in programs of catch-up modernization. Attempts to replicate Western institutional arrangements and organizational designs in this area have been undertaken in Russia since the very beginning of economic and political reforms of the 1990s. This paper considers a particular transplant, the Higher School of Economics (HSE) established in 1992, and its subsequent evolution. A structural analysis shows its divergence from the organizational patterns that served as a model. The HSE case is compared with several "representative" Western universities as well as other Russian universities. When explaining divergent patterns between the HSE and the Western counterparts, special attention is paid to the issue of power relationships and their role in the functioning of the scientific organization. The paper aims to contribute to the discussion of "cultural entrepreneurs" and their motivation.     

Institutionalism and the “Common Man” Through the Lens of Philip Klein: Business Cycles,the Public Sector,and Keynes’s Economics

This article reviews and assesses Philip Klein’s work on business cycles and macroeconomics, the public sector, and the economics of John Maynard Keynes. The article makes several findings. First, Klein built on the pioneering efforts of Wesley Mitchell to advance the development of cycle indicators and to outline an eclectic theory of cycles that remains useful for synthesizing a broad literature. Second, Klein’s essays on macroeconomics contain enduring discussions of the malleability of the “natural” rate of unemployment and the value of a behavioral approach to expectations. Third, he refocused the institutionalist attention on the public sector by introducing “higher efficiency” and other concepts to help explain how government policy plays a role in economic life. Fourth, Klein emphasized the role of fiscal policy in moderating business cycles. Fifth, his work points in the direction of today’s post-Keynesian institutionalism, both by stressing that Keynes was “profoundly institutionalist” in his approach and by arguing that conjoining Keynes and institutionalism would provide a stronger foundation for macroeconomic theory and policy.     

Sugden’s critique of Sen’s capability approach and the dangers of libertarian paternalism

The force of Sugden’s critique of Sen’s capability approach depends on the interpretation of the approach adopted. It is persuasive when public reasoning about what is good (or best) for people can justify policies which promote opportunity through (potentially objectionable) restrictions on liberty. Sunstein’s discussion of preference formation and politics shares key elements of Sen’s views. His proposals for democratic controls illustrate the potential danger Sugden signals about application of the capability approach. Sugden is also critical of paternalist views inspired by the findings of behavioural economics. One of these—Sunstein and Thaler’s ‘libertarian paternalism’—is a worrying extension of Sunstein’s earlier views and opens the door to a much wider range of interventions. Sugden rightly and forcefully resists it. His critique of the capability approach may, by contrast, be better seen as sounding a cautionary note than as an act of resistance.     

Schumpeter’s ‘conduct model of the dynamic entrepreneur’: scope and distinctiveness

Schumpeter formulated a ‘conduct model’ of entrepreneurial behaviour. Received wisdom has emphasised the economic functions of Schumpeter’s entrepreneur, neglecting behavioural aspects. Schumpeter’s model is examined; it posits a continuum of behaviours which are ‘entrepreneurial’, that rely on socially situated, tacit knowledge and are expressions of conscious, subjective rationality. Schumpeter’s model excluded unconscious optimisation and decision rules derived from bounded rationality. Comparisons are drawn with modern neoclassical, Austrian, and the older behavioural characterisations of entrepreneurial behaviour. The newer ‘effectuation’ model of entrepreneurial behaviour is also contrasted with Schumpeter’s approach. We find, among other things, that modern Schumpeterian economics associated with Nelson and Winter is not a natural continuation of Schumpeter’s model. However, some developments in neo-Schumpeterian economics, including the effectuation model deriving from the older behavioural tradition, are congruent with both the original ‘conduct model’ and Schumpeter’s directions for further research.     

Eastern Orthodoxy,Geopolitics and the 2016 ‘Holy and Great Synod of the Orthodox Church’

In March 2014, at the time of Russia’s takeover of Crimea, the heads of 14 Orthodox churches convened under the leadership of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, the Istanbul-based primus inter pares in Eastern Orthodoxy, and announced that a ‘Holy and Great Synod of the Orthodox Church’ would be held in 2016. The Synod, which took place in June 2016 in Crete, was a unique ecclesiastical gathering, bringing together competing geopolitical visions of religion, state and power. This article examines the political mobilisation of Orthodox churches by contextualising the holding of the Synod in relation to Russia’s advancement of spiritual security after the end of the Cold War. It provides a textual analysis of Synodical documents and highlights the patterns of religious and political structures in the contemporary Eastern Orthodox world.     

Rethinking the Foundation of the Original Institutional Economics Policy and Reform Program: Reactions to Thomas C. Leonard’s “Illiberal Reformers”

John R. Commons, among other original institutional economists, argued for the interests of the common people against the power of vested interests in politics and business. Against this backdrop, a new book by Thomas C. Leonard contends that, in fact, these same economists were actually “illiberal” and only promoted the interests of certain groups, such as Anglo-Saxon men, and were against the progression of minority populations, women, or the disabled. But Leonard’s argument that these economists were “illiberal,” and that their entire reform program related to the role of government in the economy and the creation of the administrative state, is essentially defunct. As Leonard (2016 Leonard, Thomas C. Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics and American Economics in the Progressive Era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016. [Google Scholar], xiv) writes in the prologue, “expertise in the service of the administrative state, what progressives call social control, has survived the discredited notions once used to uphold it.” We respond to Leonard’s book by offering a direct critique of the arguments he makes. We argue that Leonard — at least partially — takes the founders’ view on these issues out of context, and that even where some of their views would be refused by today’s institutional economists, it does not mean that the entire reform project is rejected.