BİLGİ, REGÜLASYON VE REKABET: BİR PİYASA SÜRECİ YAKLAIMI

Öz

Ekonomik regülasyon teorisi 1970lerde ortaya çıktı ve bugüne kadar varlığını sürdürdü. Şikago okulu iktisatçıları bu yeni araştırma alanının öncüleriydiler. Geçen otuz yıldan sonra regülasyon ekonomisi artık Şikago iktisatçılarının tekelinde değildir. Şikago yaklaşımı siyasetçi ve bürokratların şahsi çıkar güdüsüyle hareket ettikleri varsayımını başlangıç noktası yapar. Stigler, Peltzman ve diğerleri regülasyon süreçlerini bu yeni çatı altından incelerler. 1980lerden başlayarak, iki alternatif regülasyon yaklaşımı gelişmiştir: kamu tercihi okulu ve piyasa süreci teorisi. Kamu tercihi teorisi Tullock ve Buchanan'ın çalışmalarıyla başlar ve Şikago yaklaşımınınki gibi kamu çıkarı argümanlarını reddeder. Bununla birlikte, neo-klasik analiz araçlarını kullanmaya büyük ölçüde devam etmektedir ve statik rekabet teorisinin problemlerini sürdürmektedir. Regülasyona farklı bir yaklaşım Avusturya iktisat okulundan gelmektedir. Bu yazının amacı piyasa süreci teorisinin regülasyon ekonomisine bakışını tartışmaktır. Makalede ilk olarak, genel olarak piyasa süreci teorisi tartışılmış, sonra piyasa süreci teorisinin regülasyona bakışı analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma, piyasa süreci teorisinin regülasyona bakışının genel bir değerlendirmesinide yapmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Regülasyon, Avusturyan Okulu, Piyasa Süreci, Girişimcilik

KNOWLEDGE, REGULATION AND COMPETITION: A MARKET PROCESS APPROACH

Öz

The economic theory of regulation has been around since 1970s. Chicago school economists were pioneers in this new research area. After 30 years, economics of regulation is no longer under the monopoly of the Chicago economists. Chicago approach begins with the assumption that politicians and bureaucrats also follow their self-interests. Stigler, Peltzman and others study the regulatory processes under this new framework. Beginning with 1980s, two alternative schools developed theories of regulation: Public choice school and the market process theory. Public choice theory begins with Tullock and Buchanan’s works, and rejects public interest arguments like Chicago school. However, it uses mostly neo-classical toolbox and carries the same problems of static competition theory A different approach to regulation comes from the Austrian school. The goal of this paper is to discuss the relevance of the market process theory for the economics of regulation. To begin with, is discussed the nature of the market process theory. Then, is analyzed the market process approach to regulation. The paper ends with an assessment of the market process theory’s implications over regulatory issues.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Regulation, Austrian School, market process, entrepreneurship

Kaynakça

1. ARROW, K.(1963). Uncertainty and Welfare Economics of Medical Care. American Economic Review, c. 53, 941-973.ss.
2. BAUMOL, W. (1990). Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive and Descriptive. Journal of Political Economy, c. 85, 893-921.ss.
3. BENSON, B. (basılıyor). Regulation, More Regulation, Partial Deregulation, and Reregulation: The Disequilibrating Nature of a Rent-Seeking Society. Review of Austrian Economics.
4. BUCHANAN, J. M. (1969). Cost and Choice, Chicago: Markham.
5. (1989). Explorations into Constitutional Political Economics, College Station, Texas: Texas A&M University Press.
6. BUCHANAN, J. M. ve G. TULLOCK (1962). The Calculus of Consent, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
7. BOETTKE, P. (1994). Elgar Companion to Austrian Economics, New York: Elgar.
8. COASE, R. (1960), “The Problem of Social Cost”, Journal of Law and Economics, c. 3, 1-40.ss.

9. DEMSETZ, H. (1969). Information and Efficiency: Another Viewpoint. Journal of Law and Economics, c. 12, 1-22.ss.
10. FAULHABER, G. R. (1975). Cross-Subsidization: Pricing in Public Enterprises. American Economic Review, c. 65, 966-77.ss.
11. HAYEK, F. A. (1948). Individualism and Economic Order, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. (1978). Competition as a Discovery Procedure. idem, New Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13. HERTOG, J. den (2000). General Theories of Regulation. Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, 223-70.ss.
14. IKEDA, S. (1990). Market-Process Theory and ‘Dynamic’ Theories of the Market. Southern Economic Journal, c. 57, 75-92.ss.
15. JOSKOW, P. L. ve N. L. ROSE (1989). The Effects of Economic Regulation. R. Schmalensee ve R. D. Willig (der.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, c. 2 içinde, London: Elsevier, 1449-506.ss.
16. KIRZNER, I. M. (1973). Competition and Entrepreneurship, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
17. (1985). The Perils of Regulation: A Market-Process Approach. idem, Discovery and the Capitalist Process, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
18. LAVOIE, D., (1985). Rivalry and Central Planning, Cambridge University Press.
19. O`DRISCOLL, G. P. ve M. J. RIZZO (1996). The Economics of Time and Ignorance, London: Routledge.
20. PELTZMAN, S. (1975). The Effects of Automobile Safety Regulations. Journal of Political Economy, c. 83, 677-725.ss.
21. (1976). Toward a More General Theory of Regulation. Journal of Law and Economics, c. 19, 211-40.ss.
22. (1989). The Economic Theory of Regulation after a Decade of Deregulation. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1-41.ss.
23. POSNER, R. A. (1974). Theories of Economic Regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, c. 5, 335-58.ss.
24. (1975). The Social Costs of Monopoly and Regulation. Journal of Political Economy, c. 83, 807-27.ss.
25. PRIEST, G. L. (1993). The Origins of Utility Regulation and the ‘Theories of Regulation’ Debate. Journal of Law and Economics, c. 36, 289-323.ss.
26. SHUGHART, W. F. (1995). Public Choice Theory and Antitrust Policy. F. McChesney and W. F. Shughart (der.), The Causes and Consequences of Antitrust içinde, Chicago: University of Chicago, 7-24.ss.
27. STIGLER, G. J. (1971). The Theory of Economic Regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, c. 2, 3-21.ss.
28. TOLLISON, R. D. (1982), Rent Seeking: A Survey, Kyklos, c.35, 575-602.ss.
29. TULLOCK, G. (1967). The Welfare Costs of Tariffs. Monopolies, and Theft, Western Economic Journal, c. 5, 224-32.ss.
30. (1980). Rent-Seeking as a Negative Sum Game. J. Buchanan, R. Tollison ve G. Tullock (der.), Toward a Theory of the Rent-Seeking Society içinde, College Station: Texas A&M University Press.
31. VAUGHN, K. I. (1994). Austrian Economics in America: The Migration of a Tradition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. WEINGAST, B. (1981). Regulation, Reregulation, and Deregulation: The Political Foundations of Agency Clientele Relationships. Journal of Law and Contemporary Problems, c. 44, 147-77.ss.