On pragmatist institutional economics
The movement of New Institutional Economics (NIE), born in the seventies, followed the Institutional Economics of John R. Commons by putting the notion of ‘transaction’ in the centre of its study. The seventies were a period of appearance of an absolute authority of neoclassical economics with its hypothetic-deductive (Cartesian and positivist) methodology and the NIE followed this methodology. The NIE was assimilated by many of the members of its community with ‘transaction costs economics’. In this way they have distorted totally the initial design of Commons’ institutional economics who saw the transaction as a unit of activity common to law, economics and ethics. Instead of Cartesian analytic philosophy, which is the philosophical foundation of neoclassical economic theory, he based his institutional economics on pragmatist philosophy of Charles S. Peirce and John Dewey. As Philip Mirowski has noted “these two traditions have a profound conflict over their respective images of a ‘science’, and therefore profoundly incompatible images of ‘economic man’ and ‘rationality’” (Mirowski, 1987). Commons used the pragmatism as a model of human behaviour and as a method of research. The paper discusses the pragmatist methodology and techniques from an institutional economist point of view. It is based on a personal experience of the author in application of these methodology and techniques for economic institutional investigations. This paper is an appeal to economists to adopt the pragmatist method. This method, in its modern form related to social sciences, is Qualitative Research. It is called ‘qualitative research’ because it deals with primarily qualitative data but its most important characteristic is its affiliation to the pragmatist paradigm.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2004|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Oliver E. Williamson, 2000. "The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 595-613, September.
- Rutherford,Malcolm, 1996.
"Institutions in Economics,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521574471, Junio.
- Denzau, Arthur T & North, Douglass C, 1994.
"Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions,"
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 3-31.
- Roth, Alvin E, 1988. "Laboratory Experimentation in Economics: A Methodological Overview," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(393), pages 974-1031, December.
- Hands,D. Wade, 2001.
"Reflection without Rules,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521797962, Junio.
- Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-55, December.
- Friedman,Daniel & Sunder,Shyam, 1994. "Experimental Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521456821, Junio.
- Yefimov, Vladimir M., 1981. "Gaming-simulation of the functioning of economic systems," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 187-200, June.
- Ferber,Robert & Hirsch,Werner Z., 1982. "Social Experimentation and Economic Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521285070, Junio.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:49016. 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: (Joachim Winter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.