制度演化分析的两种范式比较--新制度经济学与演化经济学评析

新制度经济学和演化经济学是制度演化分析的两种范式，本文对分别对新制度经济学和演化经济学在制度演化方面的现有研究做出概要性的述评的基础上，对两者做了详细的比较，在制度研究方面，尽管两种范式从前提假设，研究方法，分析框架等方面存在着差异，但是两者之间还是存在一定的互补关系。为了全面深入地理解制度演化，本文提出发展一个包括两者在内的“新范式”。     

西方新制度经济学的流派渊源关系及其发展趋势

在西方新制度经济学的形成和发展过程中 ,基本保留了新古典经济学的不变硬核 ,新制度经济学通过引入信息和交易成本以及产权的约束 ,修正了新古典经济学的保护带。它们抛弃了新古典经济学的一些硬核 ,如理性选择模型。同为制度经济学派 ,新制度经济学与近代制度经济学派没有任何理论渊源关系 ,但是他们都关注制度问题。马克思历史唯物主义框架对新制度经济学体系的形成产生了重要的影响。西方新制度经济学发展的趋势呈现出模型化、强调历史的作用、注重制度差异的研究及用制度方法解释发展差异等特点。     

制度变迁理论的比较与综合--新制度经济学与马克思主义经济学的视角

从经济人和社会人的基本假设、方法论和制度变迁动力与方式异同的角度,对新制度经济学和马克思主义经济学的制度变迁理论进行比较分析和综合,得出以下结论:可以坚持经济人基本假设,将经济理性看作是个人学习与外部环境的互动来考察,将文化、伦理、社会性等作为结构和环境等制约因素,引入到对经济人的分析中;诺斯和马克思理论中的制度变迁动力说,都表达了对学习和知识存量的重视;两种制度变迁动力说,各有其适应的层次和范围;自然禀赋等非制度因素对制度变迁的影响不可忽视。     

新制度学派与新制度主义经济学的比较与评析

文章在简单介绍新制度学派和新制度主义经济学的基础上,在理论渊源、制度分析方法、市场和政府的作用、研究方法四个方面对这两个流派的差异进行比较论述,并对两个流派的理论进行简单的评述,从而对这两个流派之间的区别与联系有一个比较全面的了解,从而对制度经济学的理解更为客观准确。     

构建马克思主义制度经济学的科学范式——马克思主义经济学与新制度经济学比较研究

马克思主义经济学所采用的基本方法是制度分析方法,马克思主义经济理论本质上是制度经济学理论。新制度经济学在其价值观、分析框架和基本方法等"硬核"方面同以新古典经济学为代表的西方主流经济学基本上是一致的。但从研究对象和历史分析方法等具体分析方法方面看,新制度经济学受到了马克思主义经济学的影响,同马克思主义经济学有相通之处。这就要求我们在继承与坚持马克思主义经济学基本"硬核"的基础上,借鉴与吸收新制度经济学的某些分析方法与研究成果并进行科学综合,构建马克思主义制度经济学的科学范式。     

经济制度动态发展的理论分析—马克思制度经济学与新制度经济学的比较

经济制度动态发展理论既是马克思制度经济学也是新制度经济学研究的核心问题。通过对二者在经济制度动态发展理论的研究目的、制度发展的动因、制度变革方式以及制度创新与经济增长的关系等方面的比较分析可以看出,马克思制度经济学与新制度经济学的经济制度动态发展理论既存在差异,也有相互融通之处。以马克思主义为指导,把二者科学地结合起来并加以完善,对于我国目前的改革和发展具有重要的理论指导意义。     

A Proposed Methodological Synthesis of Post-Keynesian and Institutional Economics

Post-Keynesian and institutionalist writers have commented on the theoretical and conceptual commonalities between the two schools. Some have suggested a theoretical synthesis based on these commonalities. In spite of these theoretical and conceptual commonalities each tradition has developed significantly different methods of analysis. Instead of theoretical or conceptual synthesis we seek here to present a methodological synthesis.

Institutionalist methods have yielded "plausible" explanations, but these have been too "vague and suggestive" to be consistently used for economic policy. Post-Keynesian methods have policy necessary "rigor," but the similarity to neoclassical methods has exposed post-Keynesian theories to unwarranted synthesis with incompatible traditions.

This essay presents a synthesis of post-Keynesian and institutionalist methodology, one of "plausible rigor," combining elements of "institutional dynamics" with a heuristic framework based on John Dewey's "instrumental logic," and proposes that the resulting approach overcomes weaknesses in the methods of analysis of both schools.     

Towards a History of American Institutional Economics

This paper focuses on a number of issues that have arisen in my efforts to deal with the history of American institutional economics in the interwar period. The specific issues addressed here are (1) the choice of time frame; (2) the definition of institutionalism in terms of its commonly held ideas; (3) the treatment of the network of personal contacts that make up the institutional movement; (4) the treatment of certain institutional and cross-disciplinary connections and supports; and (5) the variety of reasons lying behind the relative decline in the position of institutional economics after World War II. Each of these issues is discussed in light of historical material and examples and with a view to detailing the specific challenges and possible solutions involved.     

从制度经济学视角看人民币汇率改革

汇率改革是一种多目标的制度安排,各利益主体在利益上既存在着一致性,又存在着矛盾性.实施混合性制度变革,将有利于最大限度地减少全社会在利益上的损失和汇率改革阻力,也有利于制度均衡的产生和改革的最终实现.     

Limits of the New Institutional Economics Approach to African Development

In the last two decades, there has been a marked shift in the research on Sub-Saharan Africa from standard neoclassical analysis to new institutional economics (NIE). The increasing emphasis on NIE is reflected in a wide range of works by international financial institutions and scholars. However, the NIE approach retains fundamental limitations due to its narrow interpretation of institutions, its over-reliance on analysis of transactions costs and property rights, and its ahistorical attachment to markets and private sector firms as major engines of development. Furthermore, NIE typically fails to look “inside institutions” to identify the complex cultural factors that shape the interests and behaviors of the members of institutions. This paper engages in a critique of NIE analysis of Sub-Saharan Africa’s economic development, and suggests the need for a nuanced analysis of property rights and culture, along with development programs to address inequality and poverty and to foster state-led development.     

"三农"问题的制度经济学分析

从制度经济学的角度来看,制度歧视、扭曲、农村组织缺位及制度变迁的滞后、非均衡是导致"三农"问题的直接原因,而诺斯的"国家理论"则揭示了"三农"问题的更深层原因。     

金融生态中的法律制度探讨--一个新制度经济学的角度

在金融生态建设中,完善法律制度是改进金融生态的重中之重.本文运用新制度经济学的相关理论,阐释了中国金融生态环境法制缺陷的深层次原因是没有真正实现从"人治"、"权治"到"法治"的根本转变,以及非正式约束与市场经济还存在诸多的矛盾,金融生态环境建设的核心是法律制度建设.当前我国金融生态建设的首要问题应以完善金融产权为核心,以强化信用秩序为重点,改善金融主体法律制度.     

价值现象学视野中的新制度经济学

新制度经济学突破了新古典经济学的范式,引入了交易费用分析范式。运用价值现象学的方法可以对新制度经济学的理论基础进行分析,新制度经济学由于忽视交易费用赖以存在的条件,所以在研究过程中经常会颠倒事物之间的因果关系,这与新制度经济学的社会心理基础有关。怨恨构造了现代社会的精神气质,新制度经济学与这种精神气质是一致的。新制度经济学对制度起源及变迁的关注都与怨恨所造成的价值假象密切相关。     

中国金融控股公司发展模式的新制度经济学分析

随着区域经济一体化和金融全球化的加强,金融控股公司混业经营所带来的规模经济性日趋强化,从而成为金融业发展的一种重要组织形式,从本质上反映了各国金融业和政府制度面向新的前景而作出的相应战略性调整,初步展开了21世纪世界银行业的市场结构与竞争态势。这种态势为中国金融业的发展和中国金融控股公司模式的选择提出了外在的要求。同时,中国的金融业将在WTO的框架下融入全球金融市场,中国的金融业也要走向世界,在国际金融市场上成长壮大,这就要求中国金融业必须与国际惯例接轨。     

两种制度经济学范式中的意识形态理论:分歧与根源

作为制度经济学的两种范式,新制度经济学和马克思经济学的意识形态理论在意识形态的本质和功能、意识形态的根源与变迁、意识形态与制度变迁的关系等方面存在着明显的分歧.整体来看,马克思的分析框架迄今仍是最有说服力的.这些分歧的根源是方法论:新制度经济学的方法论是制度个体主义和建构理性主义,马克思的制度经济学的方法论是制度整体主义与制度个体主义的统一、演进理性主义与建构理性主义的统一.     

Property and Economic Power as Issues in Institutional Economics

In the first part of this two-part paper, I presented an "irenic" reconciliation of the three apparently contradictory definitions of "institution" within original institutional economics (OIE), employing the methodology of critical institutionalism. The critical institutionalist reconciliation of these definitions conceptualizes institutions as an emergent process by which the internal and necessary relations of social structure as collective action, mediated through agency, results in the control, expansion, and liberation of the individual action of social actors in transactions. In short, an institution is the emergent process of social structure actualized in transactions (social action). Institutions, therefore, not only have a structural existence, but also an actual existence as they are the process of the emergence of the actual (in transactions) from the structural. Institutions are multi-level processes and cannot be reduced to structures, actions, behaviors, or patterns of behaviors. In this part, I demonstrate the significance of this reconciliation in two areas. The first is its ability to further differentiate the institutional definition of economics as "the science of social provisioning" from the mainstream definition of economics as "a relationship between ends and scarce means" by decomposing the institutional definition into its productive and distributive processes. The second is its usefulness in modeling the interaction of non-economic social institutions with economic institutions at varying levels of detail. I also introduce critical institutional analysis, and use as a method, for model-building and use it to build models of communal, feudal, and industrial capitalist economies.