Monoculture versus diversity in competition economics

Economics rightfully represents the major basis for competitionpolicy. Next to generating knowledge about competition and itswelfare effects, the currently popular ‘more-economicapproach’ is charged with a number of additional hopesand expectations. While this article highlights the benefitsof economics-based competition policy, it takes a cautious stancetowards excessive expectations, in particular regarding theidea that a monocultural, ‘unified’ competitiontheory as an exact, objective and unerring scientific approachto antitrust could make normative assessment and generalisationssuperfluous. Diversity in competition economics is advocatedin two ways. First, competition economics is empirically characterisedby a considerable pluralism of theories and policy paradigms.Second, it is demonstrated that this diversity of theories istheoretically beneficial for future scientific progress. Asno ultimate competition theory can ever be expected., the ‘more-economicapproach’ must be extended in order to embrace diversity.     

The principle of institutional direction: Coase's regulatory critique of intervention

That Coase's political convictions changed from an early socialismto a later neo-liberalism stands in apparent contrast to thetheoretical consistency of his early (‘The Nature of theFirm’) and later (‘The Problem of Social Cost’)contributions to economics. Offering further evidence abouthis early views in particular, this paper takes a fresh lookat Coase's views on competition and antitrust to show that heconsistently stressed the role of what we shall call the principleof ‘institutional direction’, and that this principleinvolves an important criticism of both neo-liberal and socialistviews on regulation and state intervention.     

CAPACITY UTILISATION IN THE LONG RUN: SOME FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The variability of long-run capacity utilisation has to be consideredas an expression of the determining role played by aggregatedemand in the process of growth. This paper discusses the modelproposed by Serrano in which such a determining role is apparentlyreconciled with the condition of normal utilisation of existingcapacity in the long run. It is shown that Serrano's conclusionslie on the hypothesis of the constancy of the growth rate ofautonomous demand, an assumption which seems to originate froman erroneous interpretation of the property of ‘relativepersistence’ of ‘normal’ magnitudes. The paperargues that if that assumption is abandoned, the autonomy ofaggregate demand necessarily shows itself through the variabilityof capacity utilisation in the long run as well as in the shortrun.     

Wage formation in historical perspective: the French experience

Translator's note: In this article Robert Bayer introduces thenotion ‘regulation’ as a key concept in analysesof the labour market. The term refers to the balance of social,institutional and economic forces which characte rise at a particulartime the economic system as a whole or particular parts of it.I considered translating ‘regulation’ as ‘order’,‘regime’, ‘system’ or ‘formation’;but these terms are either too static or already bear inappropriateconnotations. It was therefore decided to retain the Frenchexpression in the English text.     

The concept of routines: some clarifications

The concept of an ‘organisational routine’ is centralto the evolutionary theory of the firm. However, the conceptitself is still unclear. There is not much consensus in theliterature regarding its dimensions, its characteristics andits functions. Despite increasing use of the concept, not muchconceptual progress has been made in recent years, as remarkedby several of the leading writers on the topic. The objectiveof this paper is to contribute to further theoretical developmentof the concept of ‘organisational routine’, andto elaborate the research agenda on organisational routines.Both of these measures contribute to clarifying the conceptand enabling its application in empirical research in the socialsciences, thereby unlocking its potential for understandingorganisations and organisational change. Several problems forconceptual progress are identified. Implications for the conceptualisationof ‘organisational routines’, and for the researchagenda on organisational routines are drawn.