Two theoretical approaches to human behavior and social institutions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52195/pm.v8i1.260Abstract
This paper deals with theoretical approaches to the real economic crisis we are suffering. I set out the poverty of the theoretical solutions offered by mainstream neoclassical economics and the necessity of a new theoretical approach, which is not obsessed by the positivist method. My argument is based on the work of Ludwig von Mises who was considered to give the best theoretical arguments in the debate on the impossibility of efficient economic calculation under centrally planned socialism.
Although nowadays the Austrian School is considered old-fashion and lacking in scientific rigour, I agree with the late Professor Sumantra Ghoshal that it is necessary to escape from strait-jacketed methods and try to understand real economics problems. Our market economy is suffering from what he described as the consequences of bad theories destroying good entrepreneurial practices.
For I do think that the triumph over communism is in danger of becoming a Pyrrhic victory if we lose our understanding of the market economy and its dynamic structure based on entrepreneurs and firms.
Key words: Human action, Ludwig von Mises, Chicago School, entrepre - neurship, market process, social institutions.
JEL Classification: A10; B41; B53; D00.
Resumen: Este artículo compara los modelos teóricos con los que se analiza la crisis económica que estamos sufriendo. Planteo la pobreza teórica ofrecida por el paradigma neoclásico dominante y defiendo la necesidad de nuevas aproximaciones teóricas que no estén obsesionadas por el método positivista. Mi argumento se basa en la obra de Ludwig von Mises quien fue considerado el economista que esgrimió los mejores argumentos tóricos en el debate sobre la imposibilidad de una cálculo económico eficiente en una económica de planificación central.
Aunque hoy en día se considera que la Escuela Austriaca está pasada de moda y falta de rigor científico, estoy de acuerdo con el difunto profesor Sumantra Ghoshal sobre la necesidad de abandonar los métodos encorsetados e intentar comprender los problemas económicos reales. Nuestra economía de mercado está sufriendo las consecuencias de lo que él describe como malas teorías que destruyen buenas prácticas empresariales.
Son estas las razones por las que pienso que el triunfo sobre el comunismo está en riego de convertirse en una victoria pírrica si perdemos nuestra comprensión de la economía de mercado y su estructura dinámica basadas en la empresarialidad y la empresa privada.
Palabras clave: Acción humana, Ludwig von Mises, Escuela de Chicago, empresarialidad, proceso de mercado, instituciones sociales.
Clasificación JEL: A10; B41; B53; D00.
References
ARANZADI, J. (2006): Liberalism against Liberalism. Routledge, London.
BAUER, P.T. (1987): «The disregard of reality», Cato Journal, Spring/ Summer, 7, 29-42.
BECKER, G. (1976): The Economic Approach to Human Behaviour, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
BECKER, GARY S. and MURPHY, KEVIN M. (2000): Social Economics: Market Behavior in a Social Environment, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
BEN-NER, A. and PUTTERMAN, L. (1988) eds.: Economics, Values, and Organization, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
COASE, R. (1988 [1937]): «The nature of the firm», The firm, the market and the law, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
FRIEDMAN, M. (1953): Essays in Positive Economics, The Chicago University Press, Chicago.
—(2002): Capitalism and Freedom. (40th Anniversary Edition). The Chicago University Press, Chicago.
GHOSHAL, S. (2005): «Bad management theories are destroying good management practices», Academy of Management Learning & Education, ,vol. 4, n.º 1, 75-91.
GHOSHAL, S., BARTLETT, C., & MORAN, P. (1999): «A new manifesto for management», Sloan Management Review, (39): 9-20.
GHOSHAL , S. & MORAN, P. (1996): «Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory», Academy of Management Review, 1(1): 313-47.
HUERTA DE SOTO, J. (1998): «The ongoing methodenstreit of the Austrian School», Journal des Économistes et des Études Humaines, 8(1): 75-113.
HUSSERL, E. (1954): Die Krisis der Europäischen Wissenschaften und die Transzendentale Phänomenologie, Martinus Nijhoff Pu-blishers,La Haya.
KEYNES, J.M. (1953): The General Theory of Employment, Interest and money, Hartcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.
KIRZNER, I.M. (1973): Competition and Entrepreneurship, The Uni - versity of Chicago Press, Chicago.
—(1997): «Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process. An Austrian approach», Journal of Economic Literature, 36: 60-85.
—(2000): The driving force of the market. Routledge, London.
MIROSKY, P. (1989): More Heat than Light, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
MISES, L. VON (1966): Theory and History, 2nd edition, Arlington House, New Rochelle, NY.
—(1981): Epistemological Problems of Economics, New York University Press, New York.
—(1996): Human Action: A Treatise on Economics, B.B. Greaves (ed.), 4th edition revised, Foundation for Economic Education, New York.
MÜNCH, P. (1987): The theory of Action. Towards a New Synthesis Going beyond Parsons, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London. NORTH, D. (1991): «Institutions», Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(3): 97-112.
ROSEN, S. (1997): «Austrian and neoclassical economics: any gains for trade?» Journal of Economic Perspectives, Fall, 11, vol. 4, 139-152.
RUMMEL, R.P., SCHENDEL, D. & TEECE, D.J. (1991): «Strategic mana-gement and economics», Strategic Management Journal, 2: 5-29.
SCHUMPETER, J.A. (1947): The theory of economic development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
SIMON, H.R. (1985): «Human nature in politics: The dialogue of psychology with political science», American Political Science Review, 79: 293-304.
—(1991): «Organizations and markets», Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, vol. 2: 25-44.
STIGLER, G.J. and BECKER, GARY S. (1977): «De gustibus non est disputandum», American Economic Review, 67: 76-90.
WILLIAMSON, O.E. (1991): «Strategizing, economizing, and economic organization», Strategic Management Journal, 12: 75-94.
YEAGER, L.B. (1997): «Austrian economics, neoclassicism, and the market test», Journal of Economic Perspectives, Fall, 11, vol. 4, 153-165.
