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.     

Veblen’s Imperial Germany and the Industrialization of Latin America

Veblen’s Imperial Germany is a theory of development and industrialization, and the role the business enterprise played in these processes. Through a reassessment of Veblen’s Imperial Germany, this paper explores the main aspects that Veblen considered about the industrialization of England and Germany, deriving theoretical implications for the preconditions of a successful industrialization and development, based on an evolutionary Institutional perspective. Veblen’s analysis is then used to analyze the current state of the industrialization of Latin America, evaluating the last two decades since the 1990s, and comparing the orthodox approach, the neostructural view and the Veblenian perspective, arguing for the validity of a policy framework not reduced only to targeted protectionism but emphasizing the necessity of generating the institutional preconditions suggested by Veblen in his seminal work.     

THE CITATION IMPACT OF FEMINIST ECONOMICS

Abstract

Feminist economics is a transformative project. However, transformation generates resistance. Feminist economics can be deliberately excluded, co-opted through an uncritical application of rational choice theory, or ignored. And feminist economics can be listened to: when the United Nations consults feminist economists; when feminist economists publish in widely read journals; when a student finds inspiration in a Feminist Economics article. All of these are ways feminist economics can, and has, influenced the profession. After ten years of discourse, it is possible to take stock and assess the impact of feminist economics. This article provides a partial assessment through a consideration of citations of the journal Feminist Economics, describing its impact on mainstream economics, heterodox economics, and other disciplines. While the overall project of feminist economics encompasses much more than just one journal, studying the citations for Feminist Economics is a first step toward assessing the influence of the entire corpus.     

Habit,Decision-Making,and Rationality: Comparing Thorstein Veblen and Early Herbert Simon

The article aims to contribute to the convergence between institutional and neo-Schumpeterian evolutionary economics. It intends to help unify the behavioral foundations of these two strands of thought by returning to the original views of their main historical inspirations. It thus proposes a comparative analysis of the theory of human behavior developed by Thorstein Veblen and Herbert Simon, respectively. The article notably discusses how Simon’s early work links together the notions of habit, rationality, and the decision-making process, and explores the extent to which his views are consistent with, complementary to, or divergent from Veblen’s. The article highlights several commonalities between Simon and Veblen’s views on habits. However, Simon departs from Veblen in developing a dual model of human behavior which clearly differentiates habit-based from decision-based behaviors. The article argues that neo-Schumpeterian evolutionary economists should go beyond this binary model and build on the pragmatist-Veblenian approach, in which these two dimensions are intimately entangled. This process could allow the economists in question to take advantage of the most valuable insights of institutional economics regarding the interactions between individual choices and habits and institutions.     

Veblen,Veblenian Social Practices,and Prosperity Theology

Abstract:

At the turn of the twentieth century (1910), Veblen published an essay which explored the relationship between Christianity and capitalism by focusing on the interaction between the two institutions as they evolved. Veblen’s analysis begins by detailing the evolution of Christianity prior to the age of industrialized capitalism, after which he explores the evolutionary interplay between the two. Just over ten years prior to the publication of this essay (1899), Veblen published the Theory of the Leisure Class while over ten years after the publication of the essay (1923), Veblen dissected the sales efforts of Christianity in a note titled “Salesmanship and the Churches.” Nearly 100 years later, these three works together explain a modern and distinctly American religious movement—Prosperity Theology. This research argues that Prosperity Theology as practiced in the United States over the past nearly half century embodies and integrates all three of these works by Veblen and proposes the conceptual term “Veblenian Social Practice.”     

Elements of Publicness in Urban Transit

This paper examines the claim that Veblen's theory of cultural evolution has generalized Darwinian principles to socioeconomic phenomena. Our argument takes place in the debate around "generalized Darwinism" in evolutionary and institutional economics. We claim that Veblen frequently relied on the concept of selection and considered institutions both as units and as factors of selection. We also argue that some of Veblen's insights can be clarified by expressing them in evolutionary-game theoretic terms. Thus, we suggest a close connection between the ontological framework of generalized Darwinism and the technical study of evolutionary phenomena through evolutionary game theory.     

A Feminist Comparative Economic Systems

Abstract

This study proposes that feminist research be integrated into the field of comparative economic systems (CES) and that CES return to its traditional institutionalist methodologies to facilitate more complete analyses of economic systems and feminist alternatives to these systems and institutions. The study describes the evolution of CES, drawing attention to an increasing reliance on econometric modeling that reflects a shift in focus away from systems. An inventory of research on women and gender that has appeared in CES journals and textbooks finds little on topics other than formal labor markets in transition economies. The study contrasts this literature on women and gender in transition economies to research on this topic by women from transition economies, a literature that CES journal authors do not reference. It concludes by proposing a feminist economics approach that focuses on gender-differentiated impacts of economic systems, analyses of households, and equity as a measure of progress.     

Thorstein Veblen's Darwinian framework and gene-culture coevolution theory

At the turn of the previous century, Thorstein Veblen used Darwinian evolutionary principles to explain the macro-historical evolution of human societies, as well as the institutional structure of the modern pecuniary culture. Even if Veblen had a strong intuitive grasp of the evolutionary forces operating in society, he was not always clear and explicit in developing his ideas towards a full-fledged, consistent evolutionary social theory. This paper argues that a relatively recent theoretical approach, gene-culture coevolution theory, has the conceptual apparatus to remedy this problem and thus make Veblen's ideas an important part of contemporary evolutionary thinking in social theory.     

The old versus the new institutionalism

Marianne Ferber, a 75 year old professor emerita at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, has been a central figure in developing both the literature and the institutions of feminist economics. She was one of the first and most effective scholars to challenge Gary Becker's analysis of the economics of the family. Her textbook, The Economics of Women, Men and Work , co-authored with Francine Blau and Anne Winkler, is the standard for courses on women in the economy. Her 400 page annotated bibliography, Women and Work, Paid and Unpaid , published in 1987, is the definitive source on economic research on women's work published up to that point. Her anthology, Beyond Economic Man: feminist theory and economics , co-edited with Julie Nelson, is the first to pull together the exciting new work being done by people who have an explicitly feminist perspective on economics. She was a member of the Committee on the Status of Women in the Economics Profession in the 1970s, a founding member of the International Association for Feminist Economics (IAFFE) and for 1995 and 1996 served as IAFFE's president. This interview was conducted in January 1998.     

Joseph Schumpeter and Thorstein Veblen on technological determinism,individualism and institutions

This article investigates Joseph Schumpeter's affinities with Thorstein Veblen with respect to technological change and determinism, the future of capitalism, individualism and institutions. From a methodological point of view, a common point in their analysis is their anti-teleological view regarding economics as a discipline. Also, in the Schumpeterian system, technology is the cornerstone of economic evolution and appears as the making of new combinations. In the Veblenian theoretical framework, the bearer of change is to be found, inter alia, in technology, just like in Schumpeter's works, although not without differences. They also share the opinion that technology revolutionises capitalism and has serious implications for its future as a system. Furthermore, regarding individualism, in his work Schumpeter stresses the importance of the social milieu on individual action, a fact which bears strong resemblance to the Veblenian notion of evolution as ‘depersonalized evolution’. In this sense, Schumpeter is very close to Veblen, although Schumpeter's approach could be classified in what is called institutionalist individualism, whereas Veblen could be classified as holist. Undoubtedly, the role of institutions is of great importance in both Schumpeter and Veblen. Ιnstitutions in the Schumpeterian schema play a central role closely related to the future of capitalism. Institutional and non-institutional factors enter into complex forms of interaction just like in Veblen's approach. There, institutions are part of the social milieu and their underlying framework, much wider than mere economic and social. Of course, the theoretical analyses of Schumpeter and Veblen are not devoid of differences springing mainly from their methodological approach such as the role of the individual in the capitalist process which is probably the most significant difference regarding the importance attributed to it in Schumpeter's early works. Also, the way technical change appears constitutes another difference. However, his views are quite close to Veblen's. After all, Schumpeter began to write in a social, political, theoretical and ideological environment at a time when evolutionary ideas dominated social thought.     

Evolutionary economics and the counterfactual threat: on the nature and role of counterfactual history as an empirical tool in economics

Counterfactual conditional statements are ubiquitous in any scientific endeavour. This paper contains an analysis of the nature of counterfactual conditionals and the conditions under which they are considered assertable by scientists. The paper then applies this analysis to the use of counterfactuals in evolutionary economics, arguing that because evolutionary economics is inherently concerned with historical processes it cannot avoid the use of counterfactual history as one of its tools of empirical analysis. We discuss the strengths and pitfalls of counterfactual history. We argue that because evolutionary economics starts from the foundation that randomness may be inherent in any economic system, the very aspects of evolutionary economics that make counterfactual history a desirable empirical tool also make that tool difficult to employ. RID="*" ID="*" We thank the participants of the International Seminar on Evolutionary Economics as a Research Programme in Stockholm, May 1997, for many helpful comments. We also thank Lorri Baier for many helpful substantive and textual comments. Correspondence to: R. Cowan     

Veblen’s Two Types of Instinct and the Cognitive Foundations of Evolutionary-Institutional Economics

In this article, I provide a detailed examination of Thorstein Veblen’s conception of instincts, what he believed were the “prime movers in human behavior.” I outline the meaning of his division of instincts into simple and complex forms, and also document his account of their operational function and evolutionary origins. I then evaluate this understanding in relation to the new field of evolutionary psychology, and demonstrate how Veblen conceived of these instincts as interacting with habits and institutions. Finally, I illustrate one method of how the bio-cognitive level of behavioral reality could be integrated with the socio-institutional level of behavioral reality, and how an intermediate-interactive level between these two could have been generated. By doing so, I emphasize the need for scientifically accurate cognitive foundations to evolutionary-institutional economics (EIE)     

Veblen’s System of Conspicuous Waste

Abstract:

The touchstone by which Thorstein Veblen evaluated an expenditure was “whether it furthers the life process taken impersonally.” For Veblen, the economic problem involved the problem of social provisioning, the way a community provides for itself. To a large degree, social provisioning has been impeded by the system of conspicuous waste, a “scheme of properties, decencies, and standards of living, the economic motive of which is competitive spending.” The system of conspicuous waste represents a cultural unfolding of conspicuous waste, prompted by the introduction of continuous-mass production in the late nineteenth, early twentieth centuries. Conspicuous waste refers to the allocation of resources, time, and effort that detract from the life process. Veblen rejected the idea that the system of conspicuous waste benefits society. For Veblen, the standard of living refers to that level of consumption at which people are expected to consume. Products that prove serviceable, however, may also serve as symbols of invidiousness. Veblen used the system of conspicuous waste to compare the diverse cultural responses of England and Germany to the same technology in the early twentieth century. The system, however, plays a central role in absorbing increases in output and maintaining profits. Whether it can continue to do so remains questionable.     

The Evolution and Devolution of Bank Regulation in the United States

Development economics is understood as a postwar phenomenon without antecedents. Yet, Veblen's contribution to development economics was once widely disseminated and acknowledged. Veblen's evolutionary economics centered on historically relative and limited truths applicable to specific cultures. Veblen's growth theory is a theory of economic development: quantitative accumulation is significant because it engenders qualitative change. Veblen's analysis of the harnessing of the economic potential centers on the ability of a society to successfully introduce scientific and technological advances, giving rise to increasing returns as the surplus is invested in industrial activities. Veblen presented oblique comments and startling insights in a non-empirical manner.     

Creating a Space where Gender Matters: Elinor Ostrom (1933-2012) talks with Ann Mari May and Gale Summerfield

Abstract

In 2009, Elinor Ostrom received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for her work, especially on governance of the commons. Trained as a political scientist, Ostrom embraced interdisciplinary research and transdisciplinary collaboration. Ann Mari May and Gale Summerfield's interview with Ostrom, conducted in fall 2011, illustrates the relevance of her work to feminist economics as well as her impressive accomplishments as the first woman recipient of the Nobel prize in economics and as a pioneering woman in academia. Ostrom died on June 12, 2012.     

Women and Retirement Pensions: A Research Review

Abstract

The links between women's caring work and access to economic resources are particularly critical in the context of widespread public policy debates about retirement and pensions, many of which neglect care as a key issue for analysis. However, among feminist economists it is widely recognized that women's patterns of care provision have adverse implications for their access to economic resources in later life. The feminist economics literature examines many of the interactions between women's caring roles and their access to resources, particularly women's capacity to access economic resources through publicly mandated or regulated pension schemes. This article reviews research that places women's patterns of work and care at the center of analyses of retirement pension policy in an effort to provide a summary of research on gender and pensions policy and to contrast the extent to which differing institutional and policy frameworks accommodate women's caring roles.     

Feminist Ecological Economics and Sustainability

Synopsis New developments in feminist ecological economics and ecofeminist economics are contributing to the search for theories and policy approaches to move economies toward sustainability. This paper summarizes work by ecofeminists and feminist ecological economists which is relevant to the sustainability challenge and its implications for the discipline of economics. Both democracy and lower material throughputs are generally seen as basic principles of economic sustainability. Feminist theorists and feminist ecological economists offer many important insights into the conundrum of how to make a democratic and equity-enhancing transition to an economy based on less material throughput. These flow from feminist research on unpaid work and caring labor, provisioning, development, valuation, social reproduction, non-monetized exchange relationships, local economies, redistribution, citizenship, equity-enhancing political institutions, and labor time, as well as creative modeling approaches and activism-based theorizing.      

A Dynamic Gender Analysis of Spain's Pension Reforms of 2011

Abstract

Gender differences in the labor market have been widely studied and discussed in terms of both research and public policy. One of the contributions of feminist economics has been to analyze and demonstrate links between gendered labor market experience and retirement incomes. This paper presents a methodology to study the dynamics of gender differences among retirees in Spain. The study provides a way to predict the effects of government policies proposed in 2011 that change the institutional framework of social security systems in an effort to address the fiscal challenges of an aging population.     

Gender and Economics in Muslim Communities: A Critical Feminist and Postcolonial Analysis

ABSTRACT

This contribution seeks to delineate the broad contours of a transnational, anti-imperial feminist perspective on gender and economics in Muslim communities by bringing together feminist analyses of Orientalist tropes, development discourses and policies, and macro- and microeconomic trends. The goal is to facilitate conversations among scholars who have tended to work within their respective disciplinary and methodological silos despite shared interests. This approach pays special attention to intersectionality, historicity, and structural constraints by focusing on the diversity of the experiences of women and men by religion, location, citizenship, class, age, ethnicity, race, marital status, and other factors. It recognizes the complex relationships between the economic, political, cultural, and religious spheres and the role of local and transnational histories, economies, and politics in shaping people's lives. Finally, it emphasizes that openness to different methodological approaches can shed clearer light on the question of how various structural factors shape women's economic realities.