新制度经济学的兴起与公共财政论的发展

中国财政学的发展趋势是在社会共同需要论的基础之上发展公共财政论。近年来, 新制度经济学的兴起对正统经济理论（ 新古典经济学） 提出了挑战。新制度经济学的兴起对公共财政论产生了较大的影响, 本文拟对此进行分析, 以期更为全面地认识公共财政论。     

新制度经济学及其发展

本文简要概括新制度经济学的基本特征，描述其与新古典经济理论的不同之处，并运用这一框架来分析发展问题。     

新制度经济学比新古典经济学在中国更有市场(外二篇)

新制度经济学之所以在中国更有市场,是因为它更适宜用来分析中国的经济改革。经济改革的本质是改良旧有制度形式、产权结构和组织安排,寻找和构建一种更有效的、更能节省交易费用的新的制度形式、产权结构与组织安排,使其更适应和促进生产力的发展。新制度经济学就是用比较的方法(而主要不是边际的方法)研究制度的演进与优劣的经济学。例如属于新制度经济学的产权经济学就是研究对财产权利的界定、交换,分析以及由此产生的竞争规则对人类的竞争行为和国民财富增长的决定性影响。...     

两种新制度经济学：语义区分与理论渊源

在西方主流经济学中,尽管两个“新制度经济学（neoinstitutinal economics和new institutional economics）都将制度作为主要研究对象,但其理论基础和价值取向截然不同。国内热衷于对新古典传统的制度经济学的研究,过于冷落了凡勃伦传统的制度经济学,从而导致对后者的一些片面甚至是错误的看法。     

新制度经济学框架内的现代企业理论:局限性及思考

西方现代企业理论的产生和衍变企业作为一种经济组织形式已经有着几百年的历史了,在经济社会发展中扮演着重要角色。企业理论的演进过程基本上可以划分为两大阶段,即新古典企业理论和现代企业理论。在19世纪末形成的新古典经济学的理论中,企业是作为一种前提而存在,企业实际上是一种生产函数,它利用最优决策理论进行技术分析,对企业的假设是完全理性和利润最大化,企业本身并未得到阐述。资本和劳动只是生产要素,它们之间的关系仅是资本雇佣关系,这一命题也是作为一种前提存在而并未得到严格的证明。新古典企业理论将厂商视为一种原子来研究,…     

论法经济学建立的经济学基础

法经济学体系的建立,依赖于两大理论作基础,一是经济学理论,二是法理学基础。在经济学方面,古典自由主义的经济学说为法经济学提供了思想武器,新古典经济学为法经济学提供了重要的理论基础,新制度经济学则直接为法经济学提供了方法论基础。     

新制度经济学与中国改革

20世纪90年代，新制度经济学成为一种理论时尚。其原因之一是中国正经历一个制度变迁的时代，有大量鲜活的研究对象和广阔的应用空间。新制度经济学在中国实践的明显成效，进一步强化了其主流地位。然而，我们对其理论缺陷的关注还不够，有关针对这些缺陷对我国的改革决策可能造成的影响的研究还很缺乏。中国国情特殊，简单地嫁接新制度经济学理论只会使我们陷入误区。     

新制度经济学的新发展与政治学新制度主义:比较与启示

新制度经济学和政治学新制度主义在发展中都因为缺乏现实性、历史性和社会性而受到批评.面对相似的问题,经济学领域兴起了以青木和格雷夫为代表的比较制度分析,政治学领域兴起了历史制度主义和社会学制度主义.本文从制度观、制度对行为的影响、制度的变迁、过去的制度对现在制度的影响、文化观念和意识形态在制度形成和发展中的作用等方面,对比较制度分析和历史制度主义、社会学制度主义进行了比较,就未来制度研究的发展趋势提出了看法.     

新制度主义经济学与城市经营

近年来“经营城市”运作模式在我国取得一定成效的同时,也出现了一些偏差或负面效应。本文以新制度主义经济学为出发点,分析城市的本质是一种制度,因此,提出用“经营-管治”一体化制度安排来确保“经营城市”的健康发展。     

Commodity Prices and the New Inflation

The intention of the article is to explore trends in economics and sociology, as well as other science disciplines, like history, psychology and anthropology, and investigate the interdisciplinary exchanges that have taken place, leading to convergences and divergences between academic subjects. The “imperialism of economics” is increasingly approaching traditional academic fields of history, psychology, and sociology. However, the article concludes that sociology’s public reputation may have declined, while simultaneously economics is shifting its attention to the social dimension of economic behavior and moving toward the other social sciences; a process which has been coined “social-scienciation.” The argument is that those developments can also be seen as chances to upgrade the social sciences “around” economics. The described process also aligns with recent talk about a need for interdisciplinary studies when this article adopts a different take on the issues of interdisciplinarity and embeddedness.     

Coase on the nature of economics

Recent writings on Coase's methodology largely focus on method,at the risk of underappreciating his substantive view of economics.That economics has as its subject matter the working of thereal world economic system is Coase's main methodological messageand is also the key to understanding Coase's other methodologicalconcerns. Coase's methodological position is illustrated inthis paper by comparing him with other economists in terms oftheir differing research programmes informed by their methodologicalstances. Along the way, this paper outlines the new institutionaleconomics, a research programme inspired by Coase's methodology.     

Against the current: Sraffa's unpublished manuscripts and the history of economic thought *

The paper throws some new light on Sraffa's contribution, using material from his yet unpublished papers. Attention focuses on Sraffa's rediscovery of the distinct character of the classical theory of value and distribution and his refutation of the Marshallian interpretation that it is only a special case of demand and supply theory, his reformulation of the classical theory, and his criticism of the alternative neoclassical theory.     

Individuality and the economic order in Hegel's Philosophy of Right

This paper examines Hegel's perspective on the market economy, paying particular attention to how the market fits into his conception of freedom. Hegel's doctrine of freedom implies that market relations realize a distinctive form of freedom; however, due to the ontological deficiencies of this freedom, it must be subsumed under a superior freedom that is realized only within the state. The paper also explains why Hegel, although an economic liberal, does not accept the basic tenets of political liberalism, and why he does not regard economic science as a tool for public policy.     

The Legal-Economic Nexus from the Perspective of New Institutional Economists and Original Institutional Economists

There are two institutional economics approaches to law and economics. New institutional economists prescribe that arbitrators foster efficiency in setting economic disputes and original institutional economists focus on creating reasonable values – that is, balancing efficiency and justice. Disequilibrium between desired efficiency and perceived fairness triggers agency and is a source of coevolution of law and economics.     

"新比较经济学"的研究视角及其比较研究

20世纪90年代初期,随着苏联、东欧等社会主义国家相继崩溃,旧比较经济学没有可比较的对象,为新比较经济学创造了条件。本文主要对新旧比较经济学进行了比较研究。从比较对象上看,旧比较经济学主要针对不同经济制度进行比较;而新比较经济学侧重于相同经济制度在不同国家的效率差异。从研究方法上看,旧比较经济学主要是特征描述法,没有建立系统的理论;而新比较经济学采用主流经济学的分析方法,创立了自己的理论体系。最后,本文对新比较经济学与新制度经济学及公共选择理论进行了比较研究。     

Notes and comments. 'History versus equilibrium' and the theory of economic growth, by Mark Setterfield: a comment

Setterfield criticised previous formal models of cumulativecausation (CC) for their determinism in which economic growthrates are simply a function of 'initial conditions'. Setterfieldargued these formal models accurately represented the work ofthe leading CC figure, Nicholas Kaldor. This paper argues that,on the contrary, Kaldor identified a number of endogenous mechanismsthat account for those stylised facts of economic history, whichare absent in formal models of CC.     

Planning and Urban Growth: An Anglo-American Comparison

Understanding the complexity of institutional change is a necessary step in gaining deeper knowledge of economic performance over time, and it is one of the main challenges in the research agenda of institutionalism. Institutional change can be studied using a variety of theoretical approaches. We study some of the main approaches to institutional change in original economic institutionalism and new institutional economics. First, after comparing the approaches of Émile Durkheim and Thorstein Veblen, we focus on the contributions of the instrumental value theory and other original institutional traditions in the study of institutional change. Second, new institutional economics improved on the weak points of rational choice institutionalism regarding institutional change and incorporated the “institutions-as-rules” approach (Douglass North) and the “institutions-as-equilibria” approach (Avner Greif, Masahiko Aoki). We analyze both approaches to institutional change. Furthermore, we present an updated nonintegral overview of approaches to institutional change, show several interconnections between original and new institutionalisms, and conclude that the dialogue between the different theories of institutional change is relevant and beneficial.