Governing the innovation commons

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 1025-1047 ◽  
Author(s):  
JASON POTTS
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Institutional Context ◽  
Selection Model ◽  
Economic Organization ◽  
Economic Evolution ◽  
Distributed Information ◽  
Institutional Economic ◽  
Opportunity Discovery ◽  
Fundamental Uncertainty

AbstractThis paper analyses the origin of innovation using institutional economic theory. Because of distributed information and fundamental uncertainty, an efficient institutional context for the economic organization of innovation in its early stages is often that of a common pool resource. The theory of theinnovation commonsdraws upon Hayek, Williamson and Ostrom to present the innovation problem as a combined knowledge problem, implicit contracting problem and collective action governance problem. Innovation commons theory also implies that Kirzner's model of entrepreneurial opportunity discovery extends to higher-order groups, suggesting a multilevel selection model of economic evolution.

Conclusion

2019 ◽  
pp. 221-228
Author(s):  
Jason Potts
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Institutional Analysis ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Economic Problem ◽  
Evolutionary Origin ◽  
Economic Evolution ◽  
Entrepreneurial Opportunity ◽  
Distributed Information ◽  
Economics Of Innovation

The chapter concludes the book by placing innovation commons in a broader sweep of economic history in order to emphasize the institutional origin of innovation as an outcome of cooperative pooling of information and knowledge. It argues that cooperation to create a common pool resource in order to discover entrepreneurial opportunities is the evolutionary origin of innovation. It explains the institutional origin of innovation as the governance to facilitate this cooperation in order to solve the fundamental economic problem of discovery of entrepreneurial opportunity. The solution is in the use of institutions to pool distributed information. It explores implications for economic theory, and particularly the increased importance of institutional analysis for understanding the economics of innovation, industrial dynamics and economic evolution. It concludes by arguing that the innovation commons is the original sharing economy.

Beyond Market: Institutions of Governance in the Complex World (Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics 2009 - Oliver Williamson and Elinor Ostrom)

2010 ◽  
pp. 82-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya. Kuzminov ◽  
M. Yudkevich
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Behavioral Economics ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
Organization Theory ◽  
Development Studies ◽  
Complex World ◽  
Market Institutions ◽  
Institutional Economic

The article surveys the main lines of research conducted by Oliver Williamson and Elinor Ostrom - 2009 Nobel Prize winners in economics. Williamsons and Ostroms contribution to understanding the nature of institutions and choice over institutional options are discussed. The role their work played in evolution of modern institutional economic theory is analyzed in detail, as well as interconnections between Williamsons and Ostroms ideas and the most recent research developments in organization theory, behavioral economics and development studies.

Jean Tirole: The political economy of corporate finance (On the book by J. Tirole “The theory of corporate finance”)

2017 ◽  
pp. 128-141
Author(s):  
N. Ranneva
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Graduate Students ◽  
Corporate Finance ◽  
Critical Review ◽  
The Political ◽  
Institutional Economic ◽  
New Type ◽  
Finance Theory ◽  
Empirical Material

The present article undertakes a critical review of the new book of Jean Tirole, the winner of the 2014 Nobel Prize in Economics, “The theory of cor- porate finance”, which has recently been published in Russian. The book makes a real contribution to the profession by summarizing the whole field of corporate finance and bringing together a big body of research developed over the last thirty years. By simplifying modeling, using unified analytical apparatus, undertaking reinterpretation of many previously received results, and structuring the material in original way Tirole achieves a necessary unity and simplicity in exposition of extremely heterogeneous theoretical and empirical material. The book integrates the new institutional economic theory into classical corporate finance theory and by doing so contributes to making a new type of textbook, which is quite on time and is likely to become essential reading for all graduate students in corporate finance and microeconomics and for everyone interested in these disciplines.

Bulgaria’s Economy 1989–2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 260-282
Author(s):  
Georgy Ganev
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
Institutional Changes ◽  
Institutional Economic ◽  
State Of The Economy ◽  
Degree Of Convergence

Based on an analytical narrative, and utilizing macroeconomic and new institutional economic theory, this exposition studies the Bulgarian economy during the decades after 1989. The three decades are placed in the context of the century-and-a-half-long Bulgarian development and convergence dynamic. They are then presented in terms of clearly defined sub-periods, and each sub-period is analyzed in detail. The analysis for each period focuses on three sets of issues: macroeconomic developments, microeconomic developments, and institutional changes. The exposition ends by applying the insights from the analysis to the question of whether the state of the economy in Bulgaria as of 2019 gives grounds for pessimism (Bulgaria will continue the cycles of unsuccessful convergence) or for optimism (Bulgaria will achieve an unprecedented degree of convergence in the coming decades). The answer is that at present both expectations can be supported by sets of serious arguments.

Liberalism in Crisis and the Promise of a Reconstructed Liberalism

2019 ◽  
Vol 139 (2-4) ◽  
pp. 189-212
Author(s):  
Peter J. Boettke ◽  
Rosolino Candela
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Institutional Context ◽  
Equilibrium States ◽  
Market Order ◽  
Relative Neglect ◽  
Laissez Faire ◽  
Marginal Revolution ◽  
Common Understanding

What explains the simultaneous critiques of economic theory and liberalism during the 1930s? Early neoclassical economists had a common understanding of the proper institutional context undergirding a liberal market order. From the marginal revolution emerged a growing emphasis on analyzing markets as equilibrium states rather than processes. Because the institutions that frame a liberal market order were taken as given, to the point of relative neglect, this resulted in the notion that markets operated in an institutional vacuum. The resulting association of liberalism with laissez-faire, therefore, prompted a restatement of the role institutions play in the operation of a liberal market order.

From Relevant to in Demand?

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (3) ◽  
pp. 3-22
Author(s):  
Andrey Shastitko
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Capital Accumulation ◽  
Karl Marx ◽  
Subsequent Development ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Economic Research ◽  
Institutional Economic ◽  
Production Relations ◽  
Key Aspects

The article offers a survey of some of the ideas of Karl Marx in the context of the subsequent development of the new institutional economic theory in the 20th - early 21st centuries. It discusses various aspects of the unity of the historical and the logical in Marx’s Capital in the light of various ways of combining the historical and the theoretical in economic research, including a new economic history. The article considers the issues of the linkages between the problems of import and transplantation of institutes and the export of production relations, as well as the interaction of institutes and technologies, but in the context of the contradiction between productive forces and production relations, and possible parallels between the initial ideas of transaction costs and costs of circulation in the second volume of Marx’s Capital. It discusses the fundamental question of the absolute law of capital accumulation in the context of two key aspects of institutes - coordination and distribution.

Participatory Social Policies: Diverging Patterns in Brazil and Bolivia

2019 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Niedzwiecki ◽  
Santiago Anria
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Institutional Context ◽  
Healthcare Systems ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
Social Policies ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Popular Participation

ABSTRACTBolivia and Brazil have universalized their pension and healthcare systems, respectively. Civil society organizations participated actively in social policy expansion, yet they have done so in starkly different ways, reflecting general patterns in each country. Whereas in Brazil, popular participation in social policies takes place through “inside” formal channels, such as conferences and councils, in Bolivia, bottom-up influence occurs mostly via “outside” channels, by coordinating collective action in the streets. Understanding forms of popular participation matters because policies that allow for popular input are potentially more representative, universal, and nondiscretionary. This article argues that differences in the forms of popular participation in social policy expansion can be explained by the characteristics of the institutional context and differences in the types of movements engaged in the policymaking process. By focusing on patterns of participation, these findings add nuance to the literature on Latin America’s welfare states.

Globalization and the changing logic of collective action

1995 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 595-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip G. Cerny
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Public Goods ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Economic Organization ◽  
Nation State ◽  
Complex Process ◽  
Reinventing Government ◽  
Civil Association ◽  
Playing Fields ◽  
Modern Nation State

Globalization transforms collective action in domestic and international politics. As the scale of markets widens and as economic organization becomes more complex, the institutional scale of political structures can become insufficient for the provision of an appropriate range of public goods. A process of this sort occurred prior to the emergence of the modern nation-state, which itself constituted a paradigmatic response to this predicament. Today, however, a complex process of globalization of goods and assets is undermining the effectiveness of state-based collective action. Overlapping “playing fields” are developing, made up of increasingly heterogeneous—transnational, local, and intermediate—arenas. The residual state retains great cultural force, and innovative projects for reinventing government are being tried. Nevertheless, the state's effectiveness as a civil association has eroded significantly, and this may lead to a crisis of legitimacy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document