Globalisation And Comparative Economics: Of Efficiency, Efficient Institutions, And Late Development
Does globalisation entail a demand for uniformity, or diversity, of the (political) economic institutions of nation-states? What is the theoretical underpinning of the demand? And what are the implications of the demand for economic development? The conventional literature known as comparative economic systems has been unable to answer these question, because there is an intrinsic tension between its methodology (the neoclassical framework of individualistic rational choices and their equilibrium) and the subject matter (the multiplicity of economic institutions and development experiences in the real world). The new comparative economics has consisted of a variety of attempts to cope with this tension: some aimed at preserving the neoclassical framework at a more fundamental level, while some others aimed at transcending the framework to arrive at a new theory of economic systems and development. This paper argues that attempts that adhere to the neoclassical tradition is likely to lead to dead ends, while attempts that encompass collective as well as individualistic rationality represent more promising directions. Fuller developments of the literature, however, require incorporating objectified institutions and paradigmised technology into its sphere of inquiry. It is submitted that there are important lessons to learn from classical political economy and their modern presentations, particularly Marxian theories of the social forces of production, in this regard.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2004|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.soas.ac.uk/economics/
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.:
- Simeon Djankov & Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2003.
"The New Comparative Economics,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
2002, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Andrei Shleifer & Simeon Djankov & Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez de Silanes, 2003. "The New Comparative Economics," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm355, Yale School of Management.
- Djankov, Simeon & Glaeser, Edward L & López-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei, 2003. "The New Comparative Economics," CEPR Discussion Papers 3882, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Simeon Djankov & Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silane & Andrei Shleifer, 2003. "The New Comparative Economics," NBER Working Papers 9608, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Djankov, Simeon & Glaeser, Edward & La Porta, Rafael & Lopez de Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei, 2003. "The new comparative economics," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3054, The World Bank.
- Bonin, John P., 1998. "The "Transition" in Comparative Economics," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-8, March.
- North, Douglass C, 1994.
"Economic Performance through Time,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 359-68, June.
- Wade, Robert, 1998. "The Asian debt-and-development crisis of 1997-?: Causes and consequences," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(8), pages 1535-1553, August.
- Krugman, Paul, 1981. "Trade, accumulation, and uneven development," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 149-161, April.
- Oliver E. Williamson, 1993. "Contested Exchange versus the Governance of Contractual Relations," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 103-108, Winter.
- Edward Glaeser & Simon Johnson & Andrei Shleifer, 2001. "Coase Versus The Coasians," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(3), pages 853-899, August.
- repec:cup:cbooks:9780521590068 is not listed on IDEAS
- Smyth, Russell, 1998. " New Institutionalist Economics in the Post-Socialist Transformation Debate," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(4), pages 361-98, September.
- Russell Smyth & Dic Lo, 2000. "Theories of the Firm and the Relationship between Different Perspectives on the Division of Labour," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 333-349.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:soa:wpaper:137. 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: (Duo QIN)The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Duo QIN to update the entry or send us the correct address
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.