The cameralists: A public choice perspective

We think that cameralism offers much interesting material to public choice scholars. Treated purely as a matter of intellectual history, cameralist thought reflects an integrated treatment of considerations that today are commonly apportioned among the disciplines of economics, political science, and public administration. The unified cameralist perspective centered on the theory and practice of statecraft should surely be congenial to public choice scholars. But there is also much opportunity for scholarship on the economic and political history of the German states during the cameralist period. While we have suggested that the various German states constituted what might be considered a competitive industry in the provision of collective services, comparatively little is known about how the various economic and political processes actually operated during this period. For instance, rules of dynastical succession surely conflict with the competitive model; there is little dynastical succession in economic life. Our quick, and far from complete reading of the history suggests that there may have been much less dynastical succession than is commonly believed, and that the management of states changed hands more frequently than commonly thought. A prince who mismanaged his country frequently had to mortgage its revenue sources, or even parts of the entire country, to a more successful competitor. Similarly, treaties of succession would establish claims on the prince's throne after his death. But we have little solid evidence to offer about this; we do think, though, that public choice scholarship could bring many valuable insights to bear on this period. Indeed, the various writers within the German Historical School have in many cases left a rich legacy concerning political economy to which public choice scholars could bring valuable perspectives and fresh questions. Copyright Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1987