The State,Public Policy and Heterodox Economics: An Introduction

While most heterodox economists endorse some amount of policy activism, there is no unified conception of the state and public policy in heterodox economics. To help clarify the similarities and differences within heterodoxy – and between heterodox and mainstream economics – a panel addressing this subject was convened in 2007 at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Institutional Thought. This article introduces the essays prepared for that symposium. They include an examination of the position of Marx and Engels, a clarification of the institutionalist views of Veblen and Commons, an outline of the perspective of Post Keynesian Institutionalism, and an account of some essential contributions of Classical Pragmatism (a major school of thought within the philosophy of science). The collection advances what Robert Heilbroner called “the worldly philosophy” by seeking to understand the role of the state in a world where institutions, defined broadly as social habits, adjust to other institutions.

J.M. Clark and Institutional Economics: Remarks on the Receipt of the Veblen-Commons Award

This paper outlines the contributions of J.M. Clark to institutional economics. Clark is sometimes seen as standing between institutional and neoclassical economics, but I argue that this view is not accurate. Clark was intimately involved in the definition, promotion, and defense of institutional economics in sessions of the American Economic Association and in a variety of other forums. No other member of the institutionalist group was as much involved in the professional discussion of institutional economics as J.M. Clark. In addition, Clark made a number of key contributions to institutionalist theory in the areas of psychology and economics, the costs of decision-making, overhead costs and business-pricing behavior, the accelerator mechanism and business cycles, workable and effective competition and competition policy, and social control. These contributions, together with the graduate students he trained at the University of Chicago and Columbia University, serve to place him in the center of the institutionalist movement and not on its periphery.     

中国省区经济效率及其影响因素分析——来自2000～2005年的经验证据

探寻产生中国各省区之间越来越明显的经济发展水平差距的根源,对于构建和谐社会、维持经济的健康持续发展具有重要意义.而经济发展水平与区域内的投入产出紧密相连,为此借助数据包络分析方法,构建理论分析模型,测算省区经济发展效率,进而构建回归模型,分析影响效率的因素.基于理论分析框架,利用中国2000-2005年的统计数据对31个省区的X效率进行测算,并对影响效率的因素进行分析.研究结果表明,经济发展水平不同省区的效率存在显著差异,即各省区之间经济发展水平上的差距源于其利用现有资源禀赋获取最大化产出能力的差异.而对影响效率因素的分析则表明,人口素质与区位优势对效率具有显著的正向作用,而金融深化、外商直接投资在总体上却没有表现出理论上所认为的正向效果.最后,根据实证研究的结果,提出了一系列政策建议.     

企业“扎堆”、技术升级与经济绩效——开发区集聚效应的实证分析

开发区是中国经济转型过程产业空间组织的一种"转型制度"形式,正在经历一个企业"扎堆"向产业集群的转变。本文依据江苏省沿江开发区企业的微观调研数据,检验以开发区为载体的产业空间集聚因素与技术升级对"落地"企业经济绩效的影响,从而揭示以开发区为载体的企业集聚的性质以及演变为产业集群的趋势。实证研究表明,企业进驻开发区的主要目的是获取"政策租",由此导致开发区企业"扎堆"不具有一般意义上的产业集聚效应:靠近要素或者靠近市场的好处。企业一旦"落地"开发区,尽管它并不必然与关联企业在空间上集中,但其技术和市场行为必将与当地政府和产业关联要素发生作用,从而影响企业的经济绩效和开发区的集聚效应。因此,在产业转移和国家经济政策调整导致"政策租"耗散的情况下,基于开发区的企业集群可持续发展的关键在于提升开发区的非政策性的集聚效应。