Pluralism and heterodoxy in economic methodology

Economists work within models that are simplified depictions of reality. An argument for a pluralistic understanding of economics is that different approaches lend insight by looking at different phenomena from different viewpoints. While all economists can benefit from taking a pluralistic approach to understanding economics, Austrian school economists must be more pluralistic in their understanding and presentation of ideas than mainstream economists if they want their ideas to have an impact on mainstream economics. Despite the argument for a pluralistic understanding of economics, in research, as in other activities, specialization increases productivity. While Austrian school economists can benefit from taking a pluralistic approach to understanding economics, they are likely to be most productive in their research by specializing in the development of Austrian school methods and ideas.     

Ludwig Lachmann’s peculiar status within Austrian economics

Lachmann occupies a strange position within modern Austrian economics. He is viewed as something of an outsider and his views are often regarded as outside the mainline of modern Austrian thought. But, on several key issues – especially subjectivism and institutions – Lachmann’s positions are the dominant positions within the school. This article argues that, with little fanfare but in several important respects, Austrian economics has moved in a decidedly Lachmannian direction.

     

Using Psychology to Reinforce the Austrian Argument for Freedom: The Case of Loan Decisions

The emphatic statements of F. A. Hayek, and other members of the Austrian school of economics, in advocacy of a free society have produced much misgivings among the economics profession. The paper aims to make the Austrian views more intelligible by tracing them back to a theory of the mind that Hayek develops in The Sensory Order. More generally, the paper argues that Austrian economics would greatly benefit from extending itself from a pure logic of choice toward psychological analysis. The argument is illustrated throughout the paper by examples taken from the loan decision process of a banker.     

1985: A defining year in the history of modern Austrian economics

Mises and Hayek in the 1920s and 1940s thought of their work as within the orthodoxy of economic science. But after WWII it became increasingly obvious that the contributions of Mises and Hayek were out of step with the way the economics profession was evolving. But starting in 1974, due to the organizational efforts of Murray Rothbard and Israel Kirzner, and bolstered by the awarding of the Nobel Prize in Economic Science to FA Hayek, a resurgence of interest in Austrian economics by young scholars was initiated. Starting in 1984, but significantly in 1985, the work of the new generation of Austrian economics started to have an impact in the mainstream outlets in terms of journals and university presses. We argue that this is a defining year in the modern history of the Austrian school and that it reflected both the quality of work being done by the new generation as well as a methodological crisis within the mainstream of economic scholarship. Don Lavoie’s work in comparative economics, as well as his work in methodology, reflected this shift within the economic conversation.     

The Microfoundations of Austrian Economics through a New Classical Theoretical Lens

This paper is an attempt to contribute to the microfoundations debate by discussing the distinctive methodological characteristics of the Austrian school, and how they relate to different conceptions of equilibrium and general equilibrium models. Further, we shall focus on one specific branch of the Austrian school (those who see markets as exhibiting equilibrating tendencies) and one specific branch of neoclassical economics (the New Classical School) to highlight some hitherto overlooked points of tangency. Indeed, we shall use the monetary theories of Hayek and Lucas to argue that the limitations of New Classical models may lead to Austrian solutions.     

关于奥地利学派制度变迁理论方法论的初步分析

奥地利学派的制度变迁理论其方法论主要有三大"基石"构成,即,主观主义、方法论个人主义、演进理性主义。它对于其学派的制度变迁理论的渲化具有特殊意义。     

Remembering Jim Buchanan

James Buchanan was an important influence on the Austrian revival and not incidentally on my own career. By taking the work of Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek and Israel Kirzner seriously at a time when Austrian economics was ignored by the economics profession and by making his own contributions to subjectivist economics, Buchanan helped make the Austrian perspective professionally respectable, and inspired a generation of young economists interested in the Austrian school.     

Comparing alleged incommensurables: Institutional and Austrian economics as rivals and possible complements? ∗

The purpose of this article is to explore the changing relationship between Austrian and Institutional economics and the common ground that they appear increasingly to share. It is maintained that both parties have something to learn from each other - there are gains to be made from intellectual trade and inter-research tradition discourse. Neither Austrian economics nor institutional economics presently provides a sufficiently robust or sophisticated approach to individual and group problem-solving activity within institutional-knowledge constraints and historical time dynamics, yet they are both beginning to seriously grapple with such issues. The gulf between the Austrian and Institutional research traditions is narrowing given that there is some convergence toward a middle ground where it is recognized that individuals do not exist in a vacuum and that institutions both constrain and enable purposeful behaviour. Through increased interaction Austrians may learn to take ‘institutional’ frameworks even more seriously whilst Institutionalists may learn to be even more earnest in their treatment of ‘individual’ action within a historical time continuum.     

Communicative action and the radical constitution: the Habermasian challenge to Hayek, Mises and their descendents

This paper evaluates Jurgen Habermas's typology of action andhis recent call for a radically democratic rule of law. Thetheory of action that Habermas develops, however, differs significantlyfrom the science of action (praxeology) of the Austrian school.As such, it represents a methodological challenge to Austrianpraxeology. Additionally, Habermas's criticism of the welfarestate is shown to be somewhat consistent with Hayek's criticisms,but his alternative to the welfare state challenges the politicalvision of many Austrian economists. This paper attempts to demonstratethat both Habermas's and the Austrian school's efforts sufferfrom similar weaknesses and epistemological pretences.     

Social innovation and Austrian economics: Exploring the gains from intellectual trade

The Review of Austrian Economics - The Austrian school of economics has played a key contribution toward an improved understanding of the characteristics of economic innovation. Over recent decades...     

Uncertainty, human action and scenarios

The “scenario method,” “scenario building,” or “multiple futures analysis” emerged during the last decades as a premier instrument for strategic planning and decision making in conditions of uncertainty. This article demonstrates that there is an intrinsic link between the scenario method and Austrian theory not only at the level of basic epistemological principles but also at the methodological and applied levels. The article also argues that the scenario method could easily be embraced as a part of the Austrian family of ideas and more precisely as one of the key policy applications or decision support tools informed by that school of thought. Blending explicitly and systematically the scenario method with the Austrian ideas and forcefully making the case for the scenario approach as a policy and business administration tool, is thus one of the most effective ways of reasserting the importance of Austrian insights in areas such as business studies, public policy, and organizational theory, areas that currently have a limited exposure to Austrian ideas.     

Structure,agency and causality in post-revival Austrian economics: tensions and resolutions

Abstract

This paper aims to illustrate the benefits that accrue from critical realism's sustained, explicit reflection about ontological issues. The paper pursues this aim by examining the work of radical subjectivist Austrian economists as it has developed since the post-1974 revival in the fortunes of the Austrian school, focusing in particular on their account of the generation of socio-economic order in decentralized market economies. Ambiguities and tensions can be discerned in the radical subjectivist account of the causal forces at work in the market process. It is argued that the conceptual resources required for resolving those tensions and ambiguities are to be found in critical realism. The final section of the paper draws out some of the broader implications of the suggested resolution for radical subjectivist Austrian economics.     

Austrian Demography and Housing Demand: Is There a Connection

This paper analyses the role of demographic factors in the Austrian housing market. Linking demographic issues, in conjunction with the Austrian private housing finance, to the housing demand is the focus of the empirical model developed in this paper. We find statistical support that the demographic factors help to explain for housing demand. However, we emphasize that demographic factor such as the adult population with net migration effect is only one of the key variables which contributes in understanding the Austrian housing demand. Some of our other empirical findings indicate that the Austrian housing demand is inelastic to various economic factors is a concern for some housing policies.     

By Way of Deduction: Schütz's Essay on Taxation

Alfred Schütz's 1927 essay on capital income taxation is examined in the contexts of the evolution of the German progressive income tax, the fiscal and monetary crises of the time, and Schütz's relationship to the Austrian school of economics.     

Menger’s causal-realist analysis in modern economics

Carl Menger pioneered a unique theoretical research method which served as the foundation of the early Austrian school of economics. Menger’s causal-realist analysis was revived and formalized just before and after World War 2 by Ludwig von Mises as the “praxeological method.” Murray Rothbard, a student of von Mises’, utilized the method in formulating a comprehensive system of economic theory in his treatise, Man Economy, and State published in the early 1960s. Rothbard’s treatise became the foundational work for the “Austrian revival” in the 1970s. In this paper, we address several issues related to the role of Menger’s method in modern economics. First, ample evidence is adduced that von Mises and Rothbard each expressed a surprising ambivalence with respect to his own work in relation to the early Austrian school. Second, von Mises viewed Rothbard’s treatise as beginning a new epoch in economic theory. Third, contrary to the conventional view, a careful analysis of his treatise shows that Rothbard drew heavily on the contemporary neoclassical literature in developing his theoretical system and that his intent was never to set up a heterodox movement to challenge mainstream economics. Rather, his main aim was to consistently apply the praxeological method to rescue economics from what he considered the alien methodology of positivism, which was imported into economics after World War 2. Lastly, I will tentatively suggest that the term “Austrian economics” as the designation for the intellectual movement that coalesced in the early 1970s may now have outlived its usefulness. This term, which initially served an important strategic purpose in promoting the revival of the broad Mengerian tradition, may have come to obscure the meaning and importance of the praxeological research paradigm that Menger originated.     

The Infusion of Relational Market Obligations into the Austrian Agenda—Some Lessons Learned from Economic Sociology

Given its dictum of market equilibrium, economics in general obviously does poorly in shouldering market dynamics. Pervading obligatory traits of the market (other than mere dyadic contracting) is yet another area where not much attention is devoted. Whereas the Austrian agenda fills the first of these voids in a most sophisticated manner, its current discourse appears as oblivious concerning the manner in which market exchange transforms into relational interconnected obligations. That is to say, exchange is hardly understood as an indispensable facet of durable market obligations such as relationships 'constituting the market', but exclusively as immediate entrepreneurial arbitrage. Apart from an outright peculiar failure to recognize some of its own roots in this regard this omission unnecessarily delimits the manner in which Austrians can proceed and deepen their market analysis. The principal idea of this paper is to scrutinize the manner in which relational market obligations can be introduced into Austrian reasoning by drawing on ideas from within economic sociology. Max Weber's dictum on market openness takes on a particular role in this regard. An adjacent contribution strived for is to let this scrutiny foreshadow the manner in which such a partial reconciliation of market ideas from within economic sociology and Austrian economics could proceed.     

Schumpeter: Theorist of the avant-garde

This paper argues that Schumpeter’s 1911 edition of ‘Theory of Economic Development’ can be fruitfully read as a theory of the avant-garde, in line with such theories developed by artistic avant-garde around the same time, in particular by the Italian Futurists. In particular it will show that both Schumpeter and other avant-garde theorists sought to break with past (1), identify an avant-garde who could force that break (2), find new ways to represent the dynamic world (3), embrace the new and dynamic (4) and promote a perpetual dynamic process, instead of a specific end-state or utopia (5). This new reading helps us to understand the cultural meaning of this seminal text in economics. Secondly it greatly facilitates our understanding of the differences with the later interwar German edition and English edition, which were more cautious in their embrace of the new, less focused on the individual qualities of the entrepreneur and placed more emphasis on historical continuity. Thirdly this reading suggests a different reason for the bifurcation between Schumpeter and the rest of the Austrian school of economics. Traditionally this split is explained by Schumpeter’s affinities with the Lausanne School, this paper instead suggests that the crucial break between Schumpeter on the one hand and Böhm-Bawerk, Wieser and later members of the Austrian School on the other hand is their theory of and attitude toward social change.     

On the uniqueness of competitive equilibrium

Summary . The paper is concerned with the following question: in addition to local uniqueness, what other conditions must be imposed to ensure global uniqueness of competitive equilibrium? The answer is provided within a standard framework involving excess demand functions. Conditions are identified which have the nice property that they are true close to a regular equilibrium. Uniqueness is established by considering an adjustment process and showing that under the mentioned conditions, every equilibrium is locally asymptotically stable and moreover the process itself is globally stable; uniqueness follows from an Arrow and Hahn (1971) result. Alternatively, the paper may be seen as identifying conditions under which there is a vectorfield satisfying the requirements of an uniqueness result due to Dierker (1974). Received: July 1, 1996; revised version October 7, 1996     

Examining social processes with agent-based models

It is plain that the Austrian revival that began in the 1970s has yet to succeed in convincing the mainstream of the academy to jettison their physics-based mathematical models in favor of the sort of models and forms of argumentation that contemporary Austrians advocate. Agent-based computational modeling is still in its relative infancy but is beginning to gain recognition among economists disenchanted with the neoclassical paradigm. The purpose of this paper is to assuage concerns that readers might have regarding methodological consistency between agent-based modeling and Austrian economics and to advocate its adoption as a means to convey Austrian ideas to a wider audience. I examine models developed and published by other researchers and ultimately provide an outline of how one might develop a research agenda that leverages this technique. I argue that agent-based modeling can be used to enhance Austrian theorizing and offers a viable alternative to the neoclassical paradigm.     

From Vienna to Virginia: Exchange,rules, and social cooperation an introduction to the symposium

Serving as an introduction to the essays in this volume, we put forward an intellectual hardcore for a shared research agenda between Austrian and Virginia political economy. This research agenda rests on three pillars: exchange, rules, and social cooperation. Each of these pillars forms the distinctive flavor of Austrian and Virginian political economy with respect to theoretical approach, types and applications of empirics, and even to normative questions. Our essay explores the meaning of these pillars with respect to the broader study of political economy, as well as the intellectual superstructure of each respective school.