IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gra/wpaper/05-09.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The problems of the the Co-Ordination problem

Author

Listed:
  • Miguel A. Durán

    () (Department of Economic Theory and Economic History, University of Granada)

Abstract

This paper is focused on the Hayekian understanding of the operation of the market as the continuous solution of a co-ordination problem in a decentralised decision-making system. The aim is to show the reasons why the solution of this problem is imperfect. These reasons lie, on the one hand, in deficiencies in the mechanisms to which Hayek ascribes the task of solving the co-ordination problem and, on the other hand, in the implications of the Keynesian view on expectations and the workings of the market process. In this regard, the problem of co-ordination in a Hayekian world would have different implications if Keynes’s theory were taken into consideration and the possibility of mistakes in an uncertain world were not underestimated.

Suggested Citation

  • Miguel A. Durán, 2005. "The problems of the the Co-Ordination problem," ThE Papers 05/09, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
  • Handle: RePEc:gra:wpaper:05/09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ugr.es/~teoriahe/RePEc/gra/wpaper/thepapers05_09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roger Koppl & William Butos, 2001. "Confidence in Keynes and Hayek: Reply to Burczak," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 81-86.
    2. Theodore Burczak, 2001. "Profit Expectations and Confidence: Some unresolved issues in the Austrian/Post-Keynesian debate," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 59-80.
    3. Paul Davidson, 1991. "Is Probability Theory Relevant for Uncertainty? A Post Keynesian Perspective," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 129-143, Winter.
    4. Anna Carabelli & Nicolo De Vecchi, 2001. "Hayek and Keynes: From a common critique of economic method to different theories of expectations," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 269-285.
    5. David Campbell & Matthias Klaes, 2005. "The principle of institutional direction: Coase's regulatory critique of intervention," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 263-288, March.
    6. Lachmann, Ludwig M, 1976. "From Mises to Shackle: An Essay on Austrian Economics and the Kaleidic Society," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 54-62, March.
    7. William Butos & Roger Koppl, 1993. "Hayekian expectations: Theory and empirical applications," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 303-329, September.
    8. William N. Butos & Roger G. Koppl, 1995. "The Varieties of Subjectivism: Keynes and Hayek on Expectations," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 9505001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 May 1995.
    9. Roger Koppl & J. Barkley Rosser Jr, 2002. "All That I Have to Say Has Already Crossed Your Mind," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 339-360, November.
    10. Theodore Burczak, 2001. "Response to Butos & Koppl: Expectations, exogeneity, and evolution," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 87-90.
    11. William Butos & Roger Koppl, 2004. "Carabelli & de Vecchi on Keynes and Hayek," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 239-247.
    12. Roger Koppl, 1991. "Retrospectives: Animal Spirits," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(3), pages 203-210, Summer.
    13. Arestis, Philip, 1996. "Post-Keynesian Economics: Towards Coherence," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 111-135, January.
    14. Anna Carabelli & Nicolo De vecchi, 2004. "On Hayek and Keynes once again: a reply to Butos & Koppl," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 249-256.
    15. Bruce Caldwell, 2004. "Hayekian evolution reconsidered: a reply to Hodgson," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 301-305, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:gra:wpaper:05/09. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Angel Solano Garcia.). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dtugres.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.