Law of the jungle: firm survival and price dynamics in evolutionary markets

In this paper I develop a simple, and general model of supply and demand within which almost any theory of consumer and producer behaviour may be integrated by varying parameters. I then investigate the dynamics of this model and its implications for the theory of market evolution, and show that it unifies a number of insights from evolutionary economics. I extend upon these evolutionary theories and also characterise the distribution of prices across the market and investigate its evolution over time.     

Coevolution of economic behaviour and institutions: towards a theory of institutional change

Traditionally, economics has regarded institutions, notably norms and regulations, as fixed or exogenous. Surprisingly few insights on institutional evolution from natural and social sciences have made their way into economics. This article gives an overview of evolutionary theories of institutions in biology, sociology, anthropology and economics. These theories are subsequently compared with non-evolutionary theories of institutions. Next, the insights and approaches are integrated into a framework for analysis of institutions based on the notion of coevolution.JEL Classification: B52, D10, D70, D64, Z13J.C.J.M. van den Bergh     

A critical realist interpretation of evolutionary growth theorising

The paper discusses a critical realist interpretation of evolutionarygrowth theorising by focusing on some of its basic characteristics.The evolutionary ontology is complex, differentiated, structured,systemic, open, ever-changing and radically uncertain. Its methodologytends to be increasingly based on ‘appreciative’theorising, retroductive explanations and interdisciplinaryanalysis. After discussing these features, the paper suggeststhat critical realism may indeed constitute an important philosophicaland methodological foundation for the future development ofevolutionary theories of economic growth.     

Toward an Evolutionary and Moral Science

Thorstein Veblen asked in 1898 why economics is not an evolutionary science; he also proposed a Darwinian paradigm shift for economics. Among the implications reviewed here was his claim that Darwinian principles applied to social entities as well as to biological phenomena. It is also argued that economists have additional reasons for taking Darwinian evolution seriously. Recent work on the evolution of altruism, cooperation and morality show that we are on the brink of developing an evolutionary-grounded theory of human motivation that breaks from the selfish utility-maximizer lambasted by Veblen. This new theory accepts a biological as well as a cultural foundation for moral dispositions. As noted here, the neglected British institutional economist John A. Hobson — who was an acquaintance of Veblen — foreshadowed this approach.     

New Economic Theories

This paper analyses some of the most important spillovers of recent developments of economic theory into environmental economics. Attention is given to the anlaysis of sustainable economic development paths, where endogenous growth models are used; the implications of environmental dumping and more generally of policies concerning global environmental issues, where new trade theories are very useful; and, the effectiveness of environmental policy instruments when markets are imperfectly competitive, where industrial organisation theory is employed. The paper does not only note recent developments in environmental economics, but also relates these to the previous environmental economics literature. Thus, it can be assessed whether new results actually improve our knowledge of crucial economic and environmental issues.     

Environmental Policy Theory Given Bounded Rationality and Other-regarding Preferences

Established environmental policy theory is based on the assumption of homo economicus. This means that people are seen as fully rational and acting in a self-regarding manner. In line with this, economics emphasizes efficient policy solutions and the associated advantages of price incentives. Behavioral economics offers alternative, more realistic views on individual behavior. In this paper we investigate opportunities to integrate bounded rationality and other-regarding preferences into environmental policy theory to arrive at recommendations for more effective policies. For this purpose, we will address decisions made under risk and uncertainty, intertemporal choice, decision heuristics, other-regarding preferences, heterogeneity, evolutionary selection of behaviors, and the role of happiness. Three aspects of environmental policy are considered in detail, namely sustainable consumption, environmental valuation and policy design. We pay special attention to the role of non-pecuniary, informative instruments and illustrate the implications for climate policy.     

经济地理学与经济学关系的历史考察

经济地理学发展不仅与人文地理的其他分支交互发展,并从包括经济学在内的社会科学内吸收营养。文章通过历史性地考察经济地理学与经济学关系,尝试探索经济地理学未来的发展趋势。通过考察发现:古典经济地理学时期,经济地理学与经济学相互交织、彼此影响;1930、1940时代到1970、1980年代,经济学引领经济地理发展,而经济地理学者没有对主流经济学产生重大影响;1980年代末和1990年代初期,经济地理学吸收经济学相关理论,实现了文化、制度和关系的转向,同时主流经济学则出现了地理化趋势,出现了新经济地理学运动。1980年代以来,演化思想在经济学界逐渐兴盛起来,演化经济学理论已得到越来越多的经济学家的重视,在20世纪90年代,经济地理学家接受了演化经济学的基本概念,开始尝试构建演化经济地理学理论框架。演化经济地理学是经济地理和经济学的下一个交叉点。     

Bioeconomics as economics from a Darwinian perspective

Bioeconomics—the merging of views from biology and economics—on the one hand invites the 'export' of situational logic and sophisticated optimization developed in economics into biology. On the other hand, human economic activity and its evolution, not least over the past few centuries, may be considered an instance for fruitfully applying ideas from evolutionary biology and Darwinian theory. The latter perspective is taken in the present paper. Three different aspects are discussed in detail. First, the Darwinian revolution provides an example of a paradigm shift which contrasts most significantly with the 'subjectivist revolution' that took place at about the same time in economics. Since many of the features of the paradigmatic change that were introduced into the sciences by Darwinism may be desirable for economics as well, the question is explored whether the Darwinian revolution can be a model for introducing a new paradigm in economic theory. Second, the success of Darwinism and its view of evolution have induced economists who are interested in an evolutionary approach in economics to borrow, more or less extensively, concepts and tools from Darwinian theory. Particularly prominent are constructions based on analogies to the theory of natural selection. Because several objections to such analogy constructions can be raised, generalization rather than analogy is advocated here as a research strategy. This means to search for abstract features which all evolutionary theories have in common. Third, the question of what a Darwinian world view might mean for assessing long term economic evolution is discussed. Such a view, it is argued, can provide a point of departure for reinterpreting the hedonistic approach to economic change and development. On the basis of such an interpretation bioeconomics may not only go beyond the optimization-cum-equilibrium paradigm currently prevailing in economics. It may also mean adding substantial qualifications to the subjectivism the neoclassical economists, at the turn of the century, were proud to establish in the course of their scientific revolution.     

Evolution-Based Approaches in Economics and Evolutionary Loss of Information

Evolutionary economics provides a self-organizing, stabilizing mechanism without relying on mechanic equilibria. However, there are substantial differences between the genetic evolutionary biology and the evolution of institutions, firms, routines, or strategies in economics. Most importantly, there is no genetic codification and no sexual reproduction in economic evolution, and the involved agents can interfere consciously and purposefully. This entails a general lack of fixation and a quick loss of information through a Muller’s ratchet-like mechanism. The present contribution discusses the analogy of evolution in biology and economics, and considers potential problems resulting in evolutionary models in economics.     

Darwinism in economics: from analogy to ontology

Several social scientists, including ‘evolutionary economists’, have expressed scepticism of ‘biological analogies’ and rejected the application of ‘Darwinism’ to socio-economic evolution. Among this group, some have argued that self-organisation is an alternative to biological analogies or Darwinism. Others have seen ‘artificial selection’ as an alternative to natural selection in the socio-economic sphere. Another objection is that Darwinism excludes human intentionality. It is shown that all these objections to ‘biological analogies’ and ‘Darwinism’ are ungrounded. Furthermore, Darwinism includes a broad theoretical framework for the analysis of the evolution of all open, complex systems, including socio-economic systems. Finally and crucially, Darwinism also involves a basic philosophical commitment to detailed, cumulative, causal explanations. For these reasons, Darwinism is fully relevant for economics and an adequate evolutionary economics must be Darwinian, at least in these fundamental senses. However, this does not undermine the need for auxiliary theories and explanations in the economic domain.     

Isolation and technological innovation

Despite its importance as a formative influence in evolutionary biology, the notion of isolation has received relatively little attention in evolutionary economics and its application to technological innovation. This paper makes the case that isolation, in many guises, is a pervasive and permanent feature of the economic landscape and that its implications for technological innovation deserve further analysis. Isolation and potential implications for innovation are discussed in the early part of the paper and case studies of two military innovations are then used to illustrate the value of explicitly recognising various forms of isolation in explaining observed aspects of innovation process and outcomes.     

J.A. Schumpeter and T.B. Veblen on economic evolution: the dichotomy between statics and dynamics

At present, the discussion on the dichotomy between statics and dynamics is resolved by concentrating on its mathematical meaning. Yet, a simple formalisation masks the underlying methodological discussion. Overcoming this limitation, the paper discusses Schumpeter's and Veblen's viewpoint on dynamic economic systems as systems generating change from within. It contributes to an understanding on their ideas of how economics could become an evolutionary science and on their contributions to elaborate an evolutionary economics. It confronts Schumpeter's with Veblen's perspective on evolutionary economics and provides insight into their evolutionary economic theorising by discussing their ideas on the evolution of capitalism.     

The signs of change in economic evolution

Neo-Schumpeterian evolutionary economics has, since the early works of Nelson and Winter, defined evolution as the change of the mean of a characteristic of a population. This paper trancends the previous paradigm and explores novel aspects of evolution in economics. Within the traditional paradigm change is provided by directional selection (and directional innovation). However, the full definition of evolutionary processes has to include two important types of selection that change the variance without necessarily changing the mean. Stabilizing selection removes any outlier and diversifying selection promotes the coexistence of behavioural variants. This paper emphasizes the need for an integrated analysis of all three types of selection. It also demonstrates that the evolutionary algebra provided by Price’s equation increases the intellectual coherence and power of thinking about selection and other aspects of evolutionary processes. Directional, stabilizing and diversifying selection are then related to fitness functions that can produce the different types of selection; and the functions are used for simple simulations of the change of the population distribution of a quantitative characteristic. Finally, the paper adds to evolutionary economics a novel way of using Price’s equation to decompose the statistics of the changes of the frequency distributions. The changes of mean, variance, skewness and kurtosis are all decomposed as the sum of a selection effect and an intra-member effect. It is especially the signs of these effects that serve to define and characterize the different types of selection. Both this result and the general analysis of the types of selection are of relevance for applied evolutionary economics.     

Does Environmental Economics Produce Aeroplanes Without Engines? On the Need for an Environmental Social Science

In this paper we first critically review conventional environmental economics. We conclude that the standard theory offers too narrow a perspective for many real world problems and that many theories are not empirically tested. Consequently, environmental economics is at risk of producing aeroplanes without engines. Next, we welcome and discuss some recent trends, particularly the rapid developments of behavioural and new institutional economics as well as the increased interest in empirical analysis. Yet, we conclude that more ‘logical duels’ between competing theories, more interaction between theory and empirics, and more integration between the social sciences are needed to achieve a better understanding of real world environmental problems and the development of adequate policy handles. Finally, we present an outline of steps towards the development of an environmental social science and briefly present the papers that make up this special issue as important building stones of such a discipline.     

企业成长的经济理论概述及展望

根据企业成长经济理论的发展演化过程和主要观点,文章从古典经济学、新古典经济学、新制度经济学、后凯恩斯主义、企业制度变迁理论、彭罗斯的企业成长论、演化经济学、管理者理论八个方面对企业成长理论进行了梳理和评价,以期为我国企业成长管理实践提供理论借鉴,并认为利用自然科学新的研究成果——复杂性科学来重新审视企业的成长过程将是一种必然的趋势。     

Schumpeter's theory of economic evolution: a Darwinian interpretation

A general Darwinian framework is employed to arrive at an interpretation of Schumpeter's work that brings out clearly its specific evolutionary aspects. Schumpeter's theory of economic evolution is seen to be still highly relevant to evolutionary economics, because it sheds light on some fundamental issues: the relationship between evolutionary theory and equilibrium analysis, the usefulness of Darwinian theory for economics, and the precise nature of the evolutionary forces at work in economic systems.     

Fair is foul,and foul is fair: experimental evolutionary studies of mismatch

We describe two types of experimental evolution studies of “mismatch” that are relevant to economics. “Evolutionary mismatch” is the concept that an organism can be importantly “out of sync” with its environment. In such cases, an organism may choose an option that is inferior to a feasible alternative. Mainstream and behavioral economics do not address the notion of evolutionary mismatch. We argue for an empirical program on mismatch utilizing the methodology of experimental evolution.     

解读演化经济学的兴起——兼论演化经济学的现状与未来发展

演化经济学的兴起主要有三个原因:西方主流经济学的范式危机;自然科学的发展;社会科学领域演化思想的积累与发展.演化经济学最近的前沿研究集中于进行演化建模,对复杂性进行测量,讨论技术与制度的协同演化等几个方面.拓展对多时期动态过程的研究,将演化经济学与制度经济学、马克思主义经济学、博弈理论等进行创造性综合,更多关注学科语言的凝炼和理论建模工作是演化经济学的未来发展方向.     

我国农业产业结构调整中的路径依赖研究——一种新政治经济学的视角

在总结路径依赖理论和新政治经济学发展趋势的基础上,用演化的新政治经济学框架分析我国农业产业结构调整中路径依赖问题的形成机制,并指出了从跨学科的视角来提出对策是破解路径依赖的关键所在.最后从产业生态共生系统建立的角度提出了相应的对策建议.     

Myths about memes

Memes are conceived of as the cultural equivalents to genes. As cultural change can be modelled using theories and concepts from population genetics, a “meme’s eye view” of cultural change is arguably valid. However, such views are frequently dismissed. Whatever the merits or demerits of memetics are as a science, no prominent objections to the meme concept appear well-grounded by either evidence or logic. This paper suggests that such criticisms arise from a few key misunderstandings and fallacies concerning memes and questionable assumptions about evolution, culture and psychology on which these misunderstandings are based. These misunderstandings are described in this paper using examples of criticisms which have been made about the meme concept. These are then scrutinized using basic principles of evolutionary biology, economics, and psychology. It is hoped that future attempts to apply the meme concept are encouraged by addressing these issues here.