MAY CAMERALISM BE EVALUATED under the MERCANTILIST THEORY?

Öz

Abstract Mercantilism and cameralism are important approaches that play a role in the development of the modern state. Mercantilism aims to protect individual interests and tends to increase foreign trade. It cares about economic welfare. It showed its effect in Western European countries until the Industrial Revolution. Cameralism is a state science with a broader perspective than mercantilism. Centralizing the power of monarchical bureaucracy by increasing social welfare is the main feature of cameralist policies. Cameralism continued its influence after the Industrial Revolution and considered the public interest more than mercantilist policies. Individual welfare and interest are considered as a result of the effective activities of the management. Monarchic power supported stability in state administration and strong public finances. The aim of this study is that although it has economic directions in common with mercantilism, cameralism should not be seen as a political branch of mercantilism. Although there is a cause and effect relationship between mercantilism and cameralism, cameralism emerged for political purposes. The most important reason for the development of cameralism is the aim of providing national unity and integrity. In this respect, it differs from the mercantilist theory, which is based entirely on economic power and interests. In cameralism, a bureaucratic and status quo approach that focuses on the solution of administrative problems seems to be dominant. In the study, a literature review was used by using document analysis, one of the qualitative research methods. The findings obtained as a result of the literature review support the study problem.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mercantilism
• Cameralism
• Europe
• Economy
• State.

Kaynakça

1. Aktel, M., Kerman, U., Altan, Y., Güven, F. (2015). Kameralizmi Anlama Çabası. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 7 (12): 83-98.
2. Albayrak, S. O. (2010). Güçlü Merkezi Devletin Yönetim Bilgisi: Kameralizm. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Yönetim Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı Seminer Çalışması, 9: 1-18.
3. Aydemir, C., Güneş, H. H. (2006). Merkantilizmin Ortaya Çıkışı. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 5 (15): 136-158.
4. Backhaus, J. (2016). Mercantilism and Cameralism: Two Different Variations on the Same Theme. Economic Growth and the Origins of Modern Political Economy (Edt. Rössner, R. P.). (pp.72-79). New York: Routledge.
5. Bödeker, H. E. (2020). Reconciling Private Interests and the Common Good: An Essay on Cameralist Discourse. Cameralizm and Enlightenment: Happiness, Governance and Reform in Transnational Perspective (Edt. Nokkala, E., Miller, N.). (pp. 23-47). London: Taylor Francis.
6. Demir, A. K. (2020). Coğrafi Keşiflerin Ekonomi ve Kamu Yönetimi Sistemine Katkıları: Merkantilizm ve Kameralizm. Ç. Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 29 (1): 118-135.
7. Erdem, Ç. (2010). Mehmet Sadık Rıfat Paşa ve 19. yy Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’na Batılılaşma Bağlamında Kameralizmin Girişi. Gazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi. 12 (2): 171-196.
8. Eryılmaz, B. (2021). Kamu Yönetimi. 14. Baskı. Kocaeli: Umuttepe Yayınevi.

9. Frambach, H. (2017). The Decline of Cameralism Germany at the turn of the Nineteenth Century. Cameralism in Practice: State Administration and Economy in Early Modern Europe (Edt. Seppel, M., Tribe, K.). (pp. 239-263). UK: Boydell Press.
10. Grafe, R. (2014). Polycentric States: The Spanish Reigns and the Failures of Mercantilism. Mercantilism Reimagined: Political Economy in Early Modern Britain and its Empire, Edt. Stern, P. J., Wennerlind, C., (pp. 241-263) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Hançerlioğlu, O. (2017). Ekonomi Sözlüğü, 8. Baskı, Ankara: Remzi Kitabevi.
12. Hecksher, E. F. (2015). Mercantilism Vol I 1935. India: Isha Books.
13. Haney, L. H. (2009). History of Economic Thought. New York: Macmillan.
14. Heper, M. (1972). Avrupa’da İdare Biliminde Bazı Gelişmeler. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 5 (3): 41-50.
15. Jackson, M. (2005). The Eighteenth Century Antecedents of Bureaucracy, The Cameralists. Management Decision. 43 (10): 1293-1303.
16. Johnson, C. H. (1964). The Concept of Bureaucracy in Cameralism. Political Science Quarterly. 79 (3): 378-402.
17. Kazgan, G. (2021). İktisadi Düşünce: Politik İktisadın Evrimi. 22. Baskı. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
18. Magnusson, L. (2020). On Happiness: Welfare in Cameralist Discourse in the Seventeeth and Eighteenth Centuries. Cameralism and Enlightenment: Happiness, Governance and Reform in Transnational Perspective (Edt. Nokkala, E., Miller, N.), (pp. 23-47). London: Taylor Francis.
19. Magnusson, L. (2015). The Political Economy of Mercantilism. Routledge: London.
20. Mardin, Ş. (2021). Türk Modernleşmesi (Der. M. Türköne, T. Önder). 28. Baskı, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
21. Rössner, R. P. (2020). Freedom and Capitalism in Early Modern Europe: Mercantilism and the Making of the Modern Economic Mind. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
22. Seppel, M. (2017). Cameralist Population Policy and the Problem of Serfdom (1680-1720). Cameralism in Practice: State Administration and Economy in Early Modern Europe (Edt. Seppel, M., Tribe, K.). (pp.91-111). UK: Boydell Press.
23. Savaş, V. (2007). İktisadın Tarihi. 4. Baskı. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
24. Small, A. (2017). The Cameralists. USA: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform.
25. Screpenti, E., Zamagni, S. (2005). An Outline of the History of Economic Thought. 2nd Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Saklı, A. R. (2013). Kamu Yönetimi Disiplininin Kökenleri: Prusya Ekolü. Ege Akademik Bakış 13 (3): 285-294.
27. Spicer, W. M. (1998). Cameralist Thought and Public Administration. Journal of Management History 4 (3): 149-159.
28. Şaylan, G. (1996). Bağımsız Bir Disiplin Olarak Kamu Yönetimi: Yeni Paradigma Arayışları. Amme İdaresi Dergisi. 29 (3): 3-16.
29. Turan, B. İ. (2017). Alman Yönetim Düşüncesinin Tarihi: Kameral-Polizey Biliminden Devlet Bilimine. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
30. Tuncer, A. (2018). Patrimonyal ve Bürokratik Yönetim Arasında Bir Geçiş Dönemi Yaklaşımı Olarak Kameralizm. Journal of Political Administrative and Local Studies. 1 (2): 1-20.
31. Tribe, K. (1984). Cameralism and Science of Government. The Journal of Modern History. 56 (2): 263-284.
32. Usta, S., Akıncı, A. (2018). Bir Alman Yönetimi Yaklaşımı Olarak Kameralizm, Journal of Political Administrative and Local Studies. 11 (1): 67-86.
33. Ülgen, G. (2000). Merkantilizmden Liberalizme Geçiş ve Piyasa Ekonomisi. İ.Ü. Maliye Araştırma Merkezi Konferansları Dergisi, 40: 85-90. Wakefield, A. (2014). Cameralism: A German Alternative to Mercantilism. P. J. Stern, C. Wennerlind (ed.) Mercantilism Reimagined: Political Economy in Britain and its Empire. (pp. 134-153). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34. Wakefield, A. (2009), The Disordered Police State: German Cameralism as Science and Practice, USA, The University of Chicago Press.