IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/sprchp/978-3-030-79193-3_12.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Schumpeter, Veblen, and Bourdieu on Institutions and the Formation of Habits

In: Neglected Links in Economics and Society

Author

Listed:
  • Dieter Bögenhold

    (University of Klagenfurt)

  • Panayotis G. Michaelides

    (National Technical University at Athens)

  • Theofanis Papageorgiou

    (University of Patras)

Abstract

As we know, Joseph Alois Schumpeter is one of the greatest economists of all times, while Thorstein Veblen is an economist and sociologist who made seminal contributions to the social sciences. Pierre Bourdieu, meanwhile, is one of the most famous structural sociologists, who has consistently worked on economic dynamics. These three scholars have laid the foundations of a socioeconomic perspective. However, several important aspects of their works remain less widely discussed, or even inadequately explored in a comparative manner. Of course, investigating the origins of their ideas in evolutionary and institutional economics and re-evaluating comparatively the influences that shaped their works is quite useful for promoting dialogue between Economics and Sociology. Within this framework, this chapter focuses on the conceptual relationship between Schumpeter, Veblen, and Bourdieu. Evolution and Change shape the economic life in their respective works and, in such a framework a central point of their analyses is the interdependence between the cultural, social, and economic spheres. Furthermore, an economic sociology is built around the concept of habit formation. The three great authors’ systemic views focus on the various institutions and other aspects of cultural, social, and economic life, where habits are formed and cover diverse fields and notions such as Consumption, Preferences, Art, Knowledge, Banking, and even Capitalism. For instance, all three social scientists acknowledged the fact that the internal dynamics of capitalism introduce structural instabilities into the economic system. Also, they recognized that research and knowledge development is a collective social process. However, from a methodological perspective, their main emphasis is on the emerging dynamic evolution of habits, which is perceived as the interruption of already existing social norms and the conflict between routine and change. Several differences between Schumpeter, Veblen, and Bourdieu are observed and analysed and ideas for future research are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Dieter Bögenhold & Panayotis G. Michaelides & Theofanis Papageorgiou, 2021. "Schumpeter, Veblen, and Bourdieu on Institutions and the Formation of Habits," Springer Books, in: Neglected Links in Economics and Society, chapter 0, pages 233-259, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-030-79193-3_12
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-79193-3_12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thorstein Veblen, 1909. "The Limitations of Marginal Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(9), pages 620-620.
    2. Agnes Festre & Pierre Garrouste, 2008. "Rationality, behavior, institutional, and economic change in Schumpeter," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 365-390.
    3. Ervin K. Zingler, 1974. "Veblen Vs. Commons: A Comparative Evaluation," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 322-344, January.
    4. Dieter Bögenhold, 2013. "Social Network Analysis and the Sociology of Economics: Filling a Blind Spot with the Idea of Social Embeddedness," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 293-318, April.
    5. Dale L. Cramer & Charles G. Leathers, 1977. "Veblen and Schumpeter on imperialism," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 237-255, Summer.
    6. Shionoya, Yuichi, 2004. "Scope and Method of Schumpeter's Universal Social Science: Economic Sociology, Instrumentalism, and Rhetoric," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 331-347, September.
    7. Patrick Raines, J. & Leathers, Charles G., 1993. "Evolving Financial Institutions in Veblen's Business Enterprise System," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 249-264, October.
    8. Rutherford, Malcolm, 1998. "Veblen's Evolutionary Programme: A Promise Unfulfilled," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 22(4), pages 463-477, July.
    9. A. W. Coats, 1954. "The Influence of Veblen's Methodology," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(6), pages 529-529.
    10. Dieter Bögenhold, 2008. "Economics, Sociology, History: Notes on Their Loss of Unity, Their Need for Re-integration and the Current Relevance of the Controversy between Carl Menger and Gustav Schmoller," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 85-101, January.
    11. Enrico Santarelli & Enzo Pesciarelli, 1990. "The Emergence of a Vision: The Development of Schumpeter's Theory of Entrepreneurship," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 22(4), pages 677-696, Winter.
    12. Frank, Mark W., 1998. "Schumpeter on Entrepreneurs and Innovation: A Reappraisal," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 505-516, December.
    13. William M. Dugger, 1979. "The Reform Method of John R. Commons," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 369-381, June.
    14. Veblen, Thorstein, 1909. "The Limitations of Marginal Utility," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 17.
    15. Veblen, Thorstein, 1906. "The Socialist Economics of Karl Marx and His Followers 1," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 20.
    16. Zingler, Ervin K, 1974. "Veblen vs. Commons: A Comparative Evaluation," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 322-344.
    17. George Liagouras, 2009. "Socio-economic evolution and Darwinism in Thorstein Veblen: a critical appraisal," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 33(6), pages 1047-1064, November.
    18. Thorstein Veblen, 1907. "The Socialist Economics of Karl Marx and his Followers," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 21(2), pages 299-322.
    19. Theofanis Papageorgiou & Panayotis G. Michaelides, 2016. "Joseph Schumpeter and Thorstein Veblen on technological determinism, individualism and institutions," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 1-30, February.
    20. Olivier Brette, 2003. "Thorstein Veblen's theory of institutional change: beyond technological determinism," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 455-477.
    21. Thorstein Veblen, 1906. "The Socialist Economics of Karl Marx and his Followers," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 20(4), pages 575-595.
    22. Eric Rahim, 2009. "Marx and Schumpeter: A Comparison of their Theories of Development," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 51-83.
    23. Shionoya,Yuichi, 1997. "Schumpeter and the Idea of Social Science," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521430340.
    24. Freeman, Chris & Louca, Francisco, 2002. "As Time Goes By: From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199251056.
    25. Veblen, Thorstein, 1898. "The Instinct of Workmanship and the Irksomeness of Labor," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 4.
    26. Jevons, William Stanley, 1871. "The Theory of Political Economy," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number jevons1871.
    27. Argyrous, George & Sethi, Rajiv, 1996. "The Theory of Evolution and the Evolution of Theory: Veblen's Methodology in Contemporary Perspective," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 20(4), pages 475-495, July.
    28. Thorstein Veblen, 1898. "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 12(4), pages 373-397.
    29. Ceyhun Gurkan, 2005. "A Comparison of Veblen and Schumpeter on Technology," STPS Working Papers 0509, STPS - Science and Technology Policy Studies Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Sep 2005.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vicente Ferreira, 2019. "Why Economics Must be an Evolutionary Science," Working Papers Department of Economics 2019/01, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    2. Alexander Lenger, 2018. "Shared Mental Models and Habitus Towards a Mentality-Driven Economics," Journal of Contextual Economics (JCE) – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 138(1), pages 31-51.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Theofanis Papageorgiou & Ioannis Katselidis & Panayotis G. Michaelides, 2013. "Schumpeter, Commons, and Veblen on Institutions," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(5), pages 1232-1254, November.
    2. Olivier Mesly & María del Carmen de la Orden de la Cruz & Juan Francisco Núñez Grapain, 2014. "Preferred shares in Spain: a case of financial predation?," Economía, Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales (IIES). Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales. Universidad de Los Andes. Mérida, Venezuela, vol. 39(37), pages 77-99, January-J.
    3. Vicente Ferreira, 2019. "Why Economics Must be an Evolutionary Science," Working Papers Department of Economics 2019/01, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    4. Blind, Georg, 2015. "Behavioural rules: Veblen, Nelson-Winter, Oström and beyond," MPRA Paper 66866, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Remy Guichardaz & Julien Pénin, 2021. "Entrepreneurs “from within”? Schumpeter and the challenge of endogenizing novelty," Working Papers of BETA 2021-41, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    6. Angela Ambrosino, 2017. "The Role of Agents’ Propensity toward Conformity and Independence in the Process of Institutional Change," STOREPapers 1_2017, Associazione Italiana per la Storia dell'Economia Politica - StorEP.
    7. Dieter Bögenhold, 2008. "„Social embeddedness”: how new economic sociology goes into the offensive and meets the own roots," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 76-114, November.
    8. Felipe Almeida, 2016. "Society and brain: A complementary approach to Thorstein Veblen’s conspicuous consumer based on Tibor Scitovsky’s neuropsychology [Society and brain: A complementary approach to Thorstein Veblen’s con," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 26(2), pages 347-367, May-Augus.
    9. Theresa Hager & Ines Heck & Johanna Rath, 2021. "Competition in Transitional Processes: Polanyi and Schumpeter," ICAE Working Papers 128, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    10. Mauricio G. Villena & Marcelo J. Villena, 2004. "Evolutionary Game Theory and Thorstein Veblen’s Evolutionary Economics: Is EGT Veblenian?," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 585-610, September.
    11. Viano Francesca Lidia, 2002. "Guesswork and knowledge in evolutionary economics: verblen revisited," CESMEP Working Papers 200205, University of Turin.
    12. Dieter Bögenhold, 2008. "Economics, Sociology, History: Notes on Their Loss of Unity, Their Need for Re-integration and the Current Relevance of the Controversy between Carl Menger and Gustav Schmoller," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 85-101, January.
    13. Annie Tubadji & Brian Osoba & Peter Nijkamp, 2015. "Culture-based development in the USA: culture as a factor for economic welfare and social well-being at a county level," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 39(3), pages 277-303, August.
    14. Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner & Alfred Greiner & Thomas Kuhn (ed.), 2009. "Recent Advances in Neo-Schumpeterian Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12982.
    15. Naoise McDonagh, 2021. "Credit Guidance for a Desired Economy: An Original Institutional Economics Critique of Financialization," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 53(4), pages 675-693, December.
    16. Agnes Festre & Pierre Garrouste, 2008. "Rationality, behavior, institutional, and economic change in Schumpeter," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 365-390.
    17. Tae-Hee Jo, 2021. "Veblen’s evolutionary methodology and its implications for heterodox economics in the calculable future," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 277-295, July.
    18. Atsebi, Jean-Marc Bédhat & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, Ada, 2022. "Relative deprivation in Tanzania: Relative concerns and empathy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 389-408.
    19. Bögenhold, Dieter, 2014. "Schumpeter's Idea of a Universal Science," MPRA Paper 58115, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Thanos Fragkandreas, 2023. "Case study research on innovation systems: paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Working Papers 65, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised 15 May 2023.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B15 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary
    • B25 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary; Austrian; Stockholm School
    • B31 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought: Individuals - - - Individuals

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-030-79193-3_12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.