scholarly journals Beyond the horizon of neoclassical economics: navigation to principles of the new institutional economics

2007 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 539-557 ◽  
Author(s):  
František Svoboda
Author(s):  
Arild Vatn

- Analyzing environmental governance implies foremost to analyze institutional structures and their implications. In doing so, the present paper utilizes insights primarily from the tradition of classical institutional economics. The paper is divided in three. In the first part I describe the main features of the classical position and compare it briefly with that of neoclassical economics and the tradition of new institutional economics. In the second part I clarify what is considered the main aspects of governance as seen from an institutional perspective. In part three I move to the more specific area of environmental governance. The concept of resource regimes is defined. Moreover I analyze how different regimes influence which environmental problems appear and how they can be treated. I discuss how institutions influence the formation and articulation of knowledge and values, how they form and protect interests, how they influence the level of transaction costs and hence the possibilities for coordination, and finally how they form the motivations underlying human choices in concrete contexts. Given that all these variables are shown to be endogenous to the institutional system, the use of comparative analysis in the assessment of various governance options is emphasized.Keywords: classical institutional economics, interdependence, resource regimes, value articulation, interest protection, transaction costs, plural rationalities.JEL classifications: B52; Q50; D02; D70.


2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 541-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
CLAUDE MÉNARD ◽  
MARY M. SHIRLEY

Abstract:The trajectory of institutional economics changed in the 1970s when new institutional economics (NIE) began to take shape around some relative vague intuitions which eventually developed into powerful conceptual and analytical tools. The emergence of NIE is a success story by many measures: four Nobel laureates in less than 20 years, increasing penetration of mainstream journals, and significant impacts on major policy debates. This rapid acceptance is remarkable when we consider that it was divided from birth into distinct schools of thought. What will be the future of NIE? Will it be quietly absorbed by mainstream theory, or will it radically transform neoclassical economics into a new paradigm that includes institutions? To address these questions, we follow the sometimes-bumpy road to NIE's current successes and ponder the challenges that lie ahead.


Author(s):  
Ulrich Blum ◽  
Leonard Dudley

SummaryThe rise of the East-German economy in the 1950s and 1960s and its decline in the 1970s and 1980s is difficult to explain by neoclassical economics. However; the observed life cycle may be explained by the inclusion of concepts from old and new institutional economics and from functional economics. Three distinct periods may be identified. During the “blood” period of forced development and autocratic rule, the information system and the system of property rights were roughly compatible with the economic structure. Then, in the “sweat” period, an attempt to overtake the capitalistic societies failed. Finally, in the “tears” period, economic decline could only be disguised by unsustainable inflows of foreign capital. This institutional explanation of the East-German collapse is tested with data for the period 1949-1988 and cannot be rejected.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 372-393
Author(s):  
Lyubomira Gramcheva

Law and economics is a controversial method of legal research, increasingly popular among some legal scholars but disliked by many others. The author discusses some of the objections raised by lawyers (as well as some economists) and argues that most of these are caused by the employment of the wrong economics on the respective side of the conjoined field. She contrasts neoclassical economics, made extremely popular by the Chicago school and Professor Richard Posner in particular, with New Institutional Economics and argues that the latter can overcome the difficulties presented by the former. While neoclassical economics seems to introduce additional problems to legal scholarship, New Institutional Economics neatly matches law’s own methodological tenets. However, the analysis will remain incomplete unless a third element is added to the mix: comparative law. Thus, the author calls for the development of Comparative Institutional Law and Economics, which provides an improved explanatory methodology.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 412-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alirat Olayinka Agboola

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the provisions of both the neoclassical economics and new institutional economics theses and assesses the implications of their methodologies for property market analysis. Design/methodology/approach – This research is based on secondary literature review and desk-based study. Findings – It is argued that new institutional economics, grounded on firmer foundations of human behaviour, offers an analytical approach to the study of the property market which emphasizes the institutionally contingent nature of real estate exchange, thus placing real estate within its socio-economic context. Originality/value – In-depth examination and juxtaposition of the provisions, assumptions, philosophical orientations and limitations of these main traditions of economic thought towards the achievement of a representative study of the workings of the property market.


Author(s):  
Ilkben Akansel

Since different kinds of economics thoughts have been explored, few have been as peculiar as Old Institutional Economics (OIE) and New Institutional Economics (NIE). It is curious that almost every stream criticizing mainstream economics has a left wing. OIE, not a big fan of this, criticizes neoclassical economics/mainstream economics, given it arose in the US. OIE had no sense to left wing, on the contrary, it created an effect criticizing neoclassical economics in its core. Unlike OIE, NIE has many common points with neoclassical economics. NIE has several new aspects different from neoclassical economics, as it has chosen a completely different path than OIE. In this chapter, authors scrutinize circumstances that led to OIE, and what separated OIE and NIE. A brief, successively historical aspect is also provided.


1991 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 25-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert A Simon

The economies of modern industrialized society can more appropriately be labeled organizational economies than market economies. Thus, even market-driven capitalist economies need a theory of organizations as much as they need a theory of markets. The attempts of the new institutional economics to explain organizational behavior solely in terms of agency, asymmetric information, transaction costs, opportunism, and other concepts drawn from neoclassical economics ignore key organizational mechanisms like authority, identification, and coordination, and hence are seriously incomplete. The theory presented here is simple and coherent, resting on only a few mechanisms that are causally linked. Better yet, it agrees with empirical observations of organizational phenomena. Large organizations, especially governmental ones, are often caricatured as “bureaucracies,” but they are often highly effective systems, despite the fact that the profit motive can penetrate these vast structures only by indirect means.


2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arvind K. Sharma

Governance, as the term came to be used since the 1980s and the 1990s under the influence of the neo-liberals, is about a minimalist state. It seeks a state rollback on the ground that state is inherently inefficient when compared with the markets. Apart from this, since then other versions have developed, which led one commentator to say that so numerous are the definitions of governance that it has become analytically an intractable construct. This article presents its subject matter in three sections. The first section focuses on the semantics; it underlines the need to distinguish between the conventional and the neo-liberal usages of the term governance. The second section, which forms the bulk of the present article, discusses the five strands that collectively form the complex whole we call governance. The third and the concluding section contrasts the positivism of the neoclassical economics and new institutional economics, from which the neo-liberal governance paradigm is shaped, with the normative orientation of the classical school of administrative thoughts that dominated the discipline of public administration during the first fifty years (the 1887–1937 period).


2010 ◽  
pp. 110-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Avdasheva ◽  
N. Dzagurova

The article examines the interpretation of vertical restraints in Chicago, post-Chicago and New Institutional Economics approaches, as well as the reflection of these approaches in the application of antitrust laws. The main difference between neoclassical and new institutional analysis of vertical restraints is that the former compares the results of their use with market organization outcomes, and assesses mainly horizontal effects, while the latter focuses on the analysis of vertical effects, comparing the results of vertical restraints application with hierarchical organization. Accordingly, the evaluation of vertical restraints impact on competition differs radically. The approach of the New Institutional Theory of the firm seems fruitful for Russian markets.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document