scholarly journals Entrepreneurship and the competitive market process in the Austrian school of economics and in the work of J. A. Schumpeter

2004 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milan Říkovský
Keyword(s):  
Competitive Market ◽  
Austrian School ◽  
Market Process ◽  
Austrian School Of Economics

scholarly journals Foundations of Contemporary Economics: Israel Kirzner and the Function of Entrepreneurship

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-127
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Competitive Market ◽  
Austrian School ◽  
Market Process ◽  
Short Paper ◽  
Competitive Markets ◽  
Market Driven

Israel Kirzner has made profound contribu­tions to the theory of entrepreneurship. His con­siderable insights address the entrepreneurial function in the market process. Kirzner belongs to the Austrian school and hence assumes subjective decision-making, incomplete sets of knowledge for all subjects, and market disequi­libria. He ascribes to entrepreneurs the ability to detect through alertness market disequilibria in dynamic competitive markets. Entrepreneurs as arbitrageurs bring markets closer to equilib­ria even if in a dynamic competitive market an equilibrium remains a theoretical utopia. In this short paper, we outline the most important as­pects of Kirzner’s entrepreneurial approach and the function entrepreneurship has in market-driven processes.

scholarly journals Ludwig Lachmann as a Theorist of Entrepreneurship

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-40
Author(s):  
Steven Horwitz
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
New Products ◽  
Austrian School ◽  
Market Process ◽  
Capital Goods ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Austrian Theory ◽  
Austrian School Of Economics ◽  
The Future ◽  
Resource Ownership

Abstract One of the distinctive features of the Austrian School of Economics has been its emphasis on the entrepreneur as central to the market process. One 20th century Austrian whose work is normally not thought of as making a major contribution to the Austrian theory of entrepreneurship is Ludwig Lachmann. However, a careful reading of his 1956 book Capital and its Structure can tease out a theory of the function of the entrepreneur that is distinctly different from that of Israel Kirzner, yet still clearly situated in an Austrian conception of the market process. In this contribution, I want to emphasize two points that have been raised by previous work on Lachmann, but not explored in any detail. The first is that Lachmann’s conception of entrepreneurship is deeply bound up with the need to engage in monetary calculation thanks to the heterogeneity of capital and uncertainty of the future. For Lachmann, the key function of the entrepreneur is to “specify” the uses of capital goods. Such specification requires the use of money prices and what Mises called monetary calculation. The second contribution is to offer more detail on the way in which entrepreneurs both creatively specify and re-specify the uses of their capital goods in response to profit and loss signals. The constant shuffling and reshuffling of capital goods, of which coming up with new products or new twists to old ones are a part, is the essence of Lachmann’s implicit vision of entrepreneurship. For Lachmann, entrepreneurship is bound up with resource ownership and deployment through the creation and revision of plans in ways that are much more active than Kirzner’s conception of the entrepreneur.

The entrepreneur of the self beyond Foucault’s neoliberal homo oeconomicus

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 493-511
Author(s):  
Tim Christiaens
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Michel Foucault ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Creative Industries ◽  
The Self ◽  
Austrian School ◽  
Homo Oeconomicus ◽  
Austrian School Of Economics ◽  
Joseph Schumpeter

In his lectures on neoliberalism, Michel Foucault argues that neoliberalism produces subjects as ‘entrepreneurs of themselves’. He bases this claim on Gary Becker’s conception of the utility-maximizing agent who solely acts upon cost/benefit-calculations. Not all neoliberalized subjects, however, are encouraged to maximize their utility through mere calculation. This article argues that Foucault’s description of neoliberal subjectivity obscures a non-calculative, more audacious side to neoliberal subjectivity. Precarious workers in the creative industries, for example, are encouraged not merely to rationally manage their human capital, but also to take a leap of faith to acquire unpredictable successes. It is this latter risk-loving, extra-calculative side to neoliberal subjectivity that economists usually designate as ‘entrepreneurial’. By confronting Foucault with the theories of entrepreneurship of the Austrian School of Economics, Frank Knight, and Joseph Schumpeter, the Foucauldian analytical framework is enriched. Neoliberal subjectivation is not the monolithic promotion of utility-maximizing agents, but the generation of a multiplicity of modes for entrepreneurs to relate to oneself and the market.

Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics.

1974 ◽  
Vol 84 (334) ◽  
pp. 400 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Jaffe ◽  
J. R. Hicks ◽  
W. Weber
Keyword(s):  
Austrian School ◽  
Austrian School Of Economics ◽  
Carl Menger

scholarly journals Vínculos entre la Escuela Austriaca de Economía y el método de la inversión en valor

2021 ◽  
pp. 255-304
Author(s):  
Diego E. Quijano Durán
Keyword(s):  
Common Sense ◽  
Jel Classification ◽  
Austrian School ◽  
Economic Calculation ◽  
Austrian School Of Economics ◽  
Value Investing ◽  
Palabras Clave ◽  
The World ◽  
The Common

The Austrian school of economics and the investment method known as value investing have a similar conception of the world, so that it is possible to find multiple links between them and form a coherent structure. To the economist, this allows for a much deeper understanding of the entrepreneurial function and the manner in which economic calculation is actually performed. To the investor, it offers a theoretical framework that explains economic phenomena, permitting him to better understand the role of the entrepreneur and to protect his investment when dangerous patterns can be observed. In this essay, we begin from the common stance of both schools of thought towards common sense, the use of realistic assumptions, the importance of prudence and the low value of complex mathematics in the fields of economics and finance. We then proceed to develop in greater depth nine aspects that have strong philosophical and scientific links. Key words: Value investing, Austrian school of economics, entrepreneurship, dynamic efficiency, economic calculation. JEL Classification: A12, G17, M20. Resumen: La Escuela Austriaca de Economía y el método de inversión en valor tienen una concepción similar del mundo que permite entrelazarlas coherentemente. Al economista, le permite profundizar el conocimiento del ejercicio de la función empresarial y la realización del cálculo económico en la práctica. Al inversor, le ofrece un marco teórico para comprender mejor el papel del empresario y los fenómenos económicos y detectar temprano patrones peligrosos y así protegerse. En este trabajo partimos de la base de que ambas escuelas de pensamiento tienen sus raíces en el sentido común y los supuestos realistas, que son prudentes a la hora de ver el futuro y que dudan de la utilidad de las matemáticas complejas en los campos económicos y financieros. Sobre ello, desarrollamos nueve aspectos en los cuales hay fuertes conexiones como, por ejemplo, la manera en que el ejercicio de la empresarialidad mejora la eficiencia del mercado y coordina los planes de las personas. Palabras clave: Inversión en valor, escuela austriaca de economía, empre-sarialidad, eficiencia dinámica, cálculo económico. Clasificación JEL: A12, G17, M20.

The Austrians on Relative Inflation as a Cause of Crisis

2003 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hansjörg Klausinger
Keyword(s):  
Interwar Period ◽  
Austrian Economics ◽  
Austrian School ◽  
Austrian School Of Economics ◽  
High Esteem ◽  
Loss Of Coherence ◽  
Main Center

The development of Austrian economics in the interwar period was marked by the contrast between its high esteem at the beginning of the 1930s and its dwindling influence throughout the remainder of the decade. A variety of reasons have been conjectured for this decline (and the eventual dissolution) of the Austrian school of economics (see Caldwell 1988, pp. 517–21). A rarely mentioned factor of a more sociological nature that may have contributed to or that at least indicated the school's decline was its loss of coherence during the late 1930s, when, as a consequence of the emigration of the most prominent members, Vienna lost its role as the Austrian school's main center of communication. Insofar as this lack of coherence led not just to diversity within a unifying framework but to crucial divergences among the school's leading members, this might help to explain why after 1945 the Austrians were no longer perceived as a distinct school—some parts of their thinking had been fused into the neoclassical mainstream and others had largely fallen into disregard.

Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics.

Economica ◽  
1974 ◽  
Vol 41 (164) ◽  
pp. 451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald L. Meek ◽  
J. R. Hicks ◽  
W. Weber
Keyword(s):  
Austrian School ◽  
Austrian School Of Economics ◽  
Carl Menger
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document