Order-Dependent Knowledge and the Economics of Science
AbstractEconomists approaching the study of science typically assume the applicability of a market analogy, but then base their analysis on the presumption that science constitutes an area of pervasive market failure. Given the interactions that are actually observed to occur between scientists, we suspect that the failure is in the analogy, not in the putative market. In considering how one might better apply the economic way of thinking to the understanding of science as an activity, we suggest that it is necessary to specify exactly how scientific interaction differs from market interaction, and to be clear about how the behavior of interacting scientists might be modeled in terms of the general pursuit of self-interest in a noncatallactic context. Our model of science portrays an institutionalized mode of interaction between scientists involving the publication, use, and citation of scientific papers, and it is in the exploration of the individual incentives thrown up by this arrangement that the interesting empirical implications arise. We give a short exposition of the possible lines of investigation that could be followed based on this approach. Copyright 2003 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Review of Austrian Economics.
Volume (Year): 16 (2003)
Issue (Month): 2-3 (September)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100335
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Roger Koppl, 2011. "Against representative agent methodology," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 43-55, March.
- Roger Koppl, 2005.
"How to Improve Forensic Science,"
European Journal of Law and Economics,
Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 255-286, November.
- Garzarelli, Giampaolo & Holian, Matthew J., 2011.
"Parchment, guns, and the problem of governance,"
43724, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Robert Garnett, 2009. "Hayek and liberal pedagogy," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 315-331, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.