IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/caecpo/cep_0154-8344_1997_num_29_1_1208.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Critical Survey of J.K. Arrow's Theory ofKnowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Mehrdad Vahabi

Abstract

[eng] The great challenge for neoclassical paradigms is whether its methodological individualism is capable of coming to grips with the collective or social nature of information. Arrow's subtle observation regarding the increasing returns to communication is one of those peculiarities which contradicts the concept of scarcity of information. Bounded rationality is another example. While remaining faithful to methodological individualism of standard economic theory, Arrow describes information as a specific non-ordinary commodity, revealing the limits of imperfections of market and entering into the general category of externalities. He sets forth some fundamental principles of the economics of information and the new microeconomics by focusing on issues such as information gathering, communication efficiency, and transmission costs in deciding among forms of economic organization. In our critical review of Arrow's theory of information, we endeavor to show that despite its great achievements, this theory does not capture the tacit, institutionalized, unexpected, and non-rational dimensions of knowledge. The organizational or corporate culture cannot be derived from market failure. It is the direct outcome of internal organization of the firm and other social networks, and thus closely related to learned and transmitted knowledge in a group context. [fre] La grande interrogation portant sur les paradigmes néoclassiques consiste à examiner si l'approche en termes d'individualisme méthodologique est susceptible de prendre en compte la nature collective ou sociale de l'information. L'observation subtile de Arrow concernant les rendements croissants liés à la communication établit une des particularités incompatibles avec la notion de rareté de l'information. La rationalité limitée en fournit un autre exemple. Sans se départir de l'individualisme méthodologique de la théorie économique standard, Arrow décrit l'information comme un bien spécifique non ordinaire, qui révèle les limites ou les imperfections du marché et rentre dans la catégorie générale des externalités. Arrow expose certains principes fondamentaux de l'économie de l'information et de la nouvelle microéconomie dans son traitement des thèmes comme la collecte de l'information, l'efficacité communicationnelle, et les coûts de transmission attachés aux choix des différentes formes d'organisation économique. Dans notre revue critique de la théorie de l'information chez Arrow, nous tentons de montrer qu'en dépit de ses apports importants, cette théorie ne capte guère les dimensions tacites, institutionnelles, inattendues et non rationnelles de la connaissance. La culture organisationnelle ou corporatiste ne peut être expliquée par les défaillances du marché. Cette culture collective est le résultat direct de l'organisation interne à la firme et aux autres réseaux sociaux, et conséquem- ment, étroitement liée à la connaissance acquise et transmise dans et par un contexte social.

Suggested Citation

  • Mehrdad Vahabi, 1997. "A Critical Survey of J.K. Arrow's Theory ofKnowledge," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 29(1), pages 35-65.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:caecpo:cep_0154-8344_1997_num_29_1_1208
    DOI: 10.3406/cep.1997.1208
    Note: DOI:10.3406/cep.1997.1208
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/cep.1997.1208
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/cep_0154-8344_1997_num_29_1_1208
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/cep.1997.1208?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arthur T. Denzau & Douglass C. North, 1994. "Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 3-31, February.
    2. Dosi, G, 1991. "Some Thoughts on the Promises, Challenges and Dangers of an "Evolutionary Perspective" in Economics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 5-7, January.
    3. Nelson, Richard R, 1980. "Production Sets, Technological Knowledge, and R & D: Fragile and Overworked Constructs for Analysis of Productivity Growth?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 62-67, May.
    4. Morishima,Michio, 1992. "Capital and Credit," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521418409.
    5. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1975. "The Theory of "Screening," Education, and the Distribution of Income," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 283-300, June.
    7. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-1171, September.
    8. Arrow, Kenneth J, 1991. "Scale Returns in Communication and Elite Control of Organizations," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 1-6, Special I.
    9. North, Douglass C, 1994. "Economic Performance through Time," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 359-368, June.
    10. F. A. Lutz, 1961. "The Theory of Capital," International Economic Association Series, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-08452-4 edited by D. C. Hague, December.
    11. Arrow, Kenneth J, 1994. "Methodological Individualism and Social Knowledge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 1-9, May.
    12. Nicholas Kaldor, 1961. "Capital Accumulation and Economic Growth," International Economic Association Series, in: D. C. Hague (ed.), The Theory of Capital, chapter 0, pages 177-222, Palgrave Macmillan.
    13. Langlois, Richard N., 1983. "Internal Organization In a Dynamic Context: Some Theoretical Considerations," Working Papers 83-04, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    14. Morishima,Michio, 1994. "Capital and Credit," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521466387.
    15. Nelson, Richard R & Winter, Sidney G, 1980. "Firm and Industry Response to Changed Market Conditions: An Evolutionary Approach," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(2), pages 179-202, April.
    16. Arrow, Kenneth J, 1969. "Classificatory Notes on the Production and Transmission of Technological Knowledge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 29-35, May.
    17. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    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. Mehrdad Vahabi, 1999. "From Walrasian General Equilibrium to Incomplete Contracts: Making Sense of Institutions," Post-Print halshs-03704424, HAL.

    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. Rinaldo Evangelista, 2018. "Technology and Economic Development: The Schumpeterian Legacy," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 50(1), pages 136-153, March.
    2. Rinaldo Evangelista, 2015. "Technology, development and economic crisis: the Schumpeterian legacy," Working Papers 23, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Jun 2015.
    3. M. Ricottilli, 1990. "Technical Progress and Structural Change in the Process of Economic Development," Working Papers 101, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    4. Parui, Pintu, 2021. "Financialization and endogenous technological change: A post-Kaleckian perspective," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 221-244.
    5. Bent Dalum & Gert Villumsen, 1996. "Are OECD Export Specialisation Patterns 'Sticky'? Relations to the Convergence-Divergence Debate," DRUID Working Papers 96-3, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    6. Kylaheiko, Kalevi, 1998. "Making sense of technology: Towards a synthesis between neoclassical and evolutionary approaches," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 319-332, September.
    7. Hodgson, Geoffrey M., 1998. "Competence and contract in the theory of the firm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 179-201, April.
    8. Paul Lewis, 2021. "The innovation systems approach: an Austrian and Ostromian perspective," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
    9. Giorgio Fagiolo & Paul Windrum & Alessio Moneta, 2006. "Empirical Validation of Agent Based Models: A Critical Survey," LEM Papers Series 2006/14, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    10. Amavilah, Voxi Heinrich, 2014. "Human Knowledge and a Commonsensical Measure of Human Capital: A Proposal," MPRA Paper 57670, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Ageliki Anagnostou & Ioannis Panteladis & Maria Tsiapa, 2015. "Disentangling different patterns of business cycle synchronicity in the EU regions," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 615-641, August.
    12. Giovanni Dosi & Andrea Roventini & Emmanuele Russo, 2020. "Public Policies And The Art Of Catching Up," Working Papers hal-03242369, HAL.
    13. Joly, P. B. & Mangematin, V., 1996. "Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisation of R & D: the dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 901-922, September.
    14. Alexander Galetovic & Ángel Cabrera, "undated". "Tópicos en la Economía de la Investigación Tecnológica," Documentos de Trabajo 121, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    15. Mohnen, Pierre & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2005. "Complementarities in innovation policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1431-1450, August.
    16. Taalbi, Josef, 2017. "What drives innovation? Evidence from economic history," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1437-1453.
    17. Balconi, Margherita, 2002. "Tacitness, codification of technological knowledge and the organisation of industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 357-379, March.
    18. Montobbio, Fabio & Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "The Globalization of Technology in Emerging Markets: A Gravity Model on the Determinants of International Patent Collaborations," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 281-299.
    19. Giovanni Dosi & Patrick Llerena & Mauro Sylos Labin, 2005. "Science-Technology-Industry Links and the ”European Paradox”: Some Notes on the Dynamics of Scientific and Technological Research in Europe," Working Papers of BETA 2005-11, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    20. Mario Coccia, 2006. "Classifications of innovations: Survey and future directions," CERIS Working Paper 200602, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B31 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought: Individuals - - - Individuals
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:prs:caecpo:cep_0154-8344_1997_num_29_1_1208. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/cep .

    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.