The Visible Hand of Economics: Institutional Chance Performance and Sustainable Institutional Development

Yıl 2016, , 73 - 92, 29.10.2016

Selma Sevinç Orhan

https://doi.org/10.17233/se.2016.06.003

Öz

In this study, there is the analysis of the relationship between economic development and institutionalization process which enhances the institutional change performance of the economy and reduces operation costs. The change and regulation process, which is brought into the price mechanism by mainstream economics through invisible hand metaphor, is discussed within “visible hand” logic by property rights, transaction costs, and contracts economy approach in the NIE approach. By this way, institutions assume the visible hand role in the processes of regulation, preparation and implementation of common mandatory rules and laws in social life which are ignored by mainstream economics. The concept of institution is the product of an interdisciplinary approach providing organizational and behavioral connection between economic theory and economic institutions and giving the economics the lost opportunity to question the political economics.

Kaynakça

• Acemoğlu, D.S. & J. Robinson (2002), “Reversal of Furtune Geography and Institutions in Making of Modern Income Distribution”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117, 1231-1294.
• Acemoğlu, D.S. & J. Robinson & Y. Thaicharoen (2003), “Institutional Causes, Macroeconomic Syptoms. Volatility, Crises and Growth”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 50, 49-123.
• Acemoğlu, D.S. & J. Robinson (2012), Ulusların Düşüşü, Güç Zenginlik ve Yoksulluğun Kökenleri, Çev. F.R. Velioğlu, Doğan Kitapevi.
• Aoki, M. (2001), Toward a Comparative Institutional Analyisis, Cambridge, MA: MIT Pres.
• Azfar, O. (2002), “The NIE Approach to Economic Development: An Analytical Primer”, Forum 1. Introductory Session on NIE, The Irish Centre, Departmant of Economics, Univercity of Maryland, Collage Park, January 11.
• Brunner, K. (1992), “Ronald Coase: Old Fashioned Schooler”, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94(1), Cambridge, MA,
• Cheung, S. (1970), “The Structure of A Contract and Theory of A Non Exclusive Resource”, Journal of Law and Economics, XIII (1970), 49-70.
• Coase, R.H. (1937), “The Nature of the Firm”, Economica, New Series, 4(16), 386-405.
• Coase, R.H. (1984), “The New Institutional Economics”, Journal of Institutional and Theorical Economics, 140, 229-231.
• Coase, R.H. (1994), Essays on Economics and Economists, The University of Chicago Press.
• Coase, R.H. (1960), “The Problem of Social Cost”, Journal of Law and Economics, 3, 1-44.
• Coase, R.H. (1988), The Firm, The Market and The Law, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Coase R.H. (1992), “The Institutional Structure of Production”, The American Economic Review, 82(4), 713-719.
• Cornes, R. & T. Sandler (1986), The Theory of Externalities, Cambridge Unv. Press.
• Cohen, J.M. (1996), “Ethnicity, Foreign Aid and Economic Growth in Sub Saharam Africa: The Case of Kenya”, HIID Development Discussion Paper, No. 520.
• Davis, L.E. & D.C. North (1971), Institutional Change and American Economic Growth, Cambridge University Press, Chambridge.
• De Alessi, L. (1987), “Nature and Methodological Foundations of Some Recent Extensions of Economic Theory in Economic Imperialism”, in: Economic Imperialism: The Economic Approach Applied Outside the Field of Economics, eds. G. Radnitzky & P. Bernholz, New York: Paragon House, 51-76.
• De Alessi, L. (1993), “Property Rights, Transaction Costs and X Efficiency, An Essay in Economic Theory”, American Economic Review, 3(1), 64-81.
• Denzau, A. & D.C. North (1994), ‘Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions’, Kyklos, 47, 3-31.
• Demsetz, H. (1964), “The Exchange and Enforcement of Property Rights”, American Economic Review, Paper and Proceeding, 57, 11-26.
• Demsetz, H. (1967), “Toward A Theory of Property Rights”, American Economic Review, Paper and Proceeding, 57, 347-359.
• Dequech, D. (2002), “Demarcation between The Old and The New Institutional Economics: Recent Complications”, JEI Journal of Economic Issues, 36(2), 565-72.
• Eggertsson, T. (1990), Economic Behavior and Institution, Chambridge University Press, MA.
• Frubotn, E. & S. Pejovich (1972), “The Economics of Property Rights: A Survey of Recent Literature”, Journal of Economic Literature, 1137-1401.
• Gonick, L.S. & R.M. Rosh (1988), “The Structural Constraints of The World-Economy on National Political Development”, Comparative Political Studies, 21, 171–199.
• Grief, A. (2005), Institutions and The Path to the Modern Economy: Lessons from Medievel Trade, Political Economy of Institutions and Decicions, Cambridge, Grunchy (1947).
• Hayek, F.A. (1967), Studies in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Hayek, F.A. (1973), Law, Legislation, and Liberty: Rules and Order, Vol. 1, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• McKean, R. (1970), “Products Liability Implications of Some Changing Property Rights”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(4), 611-626.
• McKean, R. (1972), “Property Rights Within Gowernment and Devices to Increase Govermental Efficiency, Southern Economic Journal, 39(2), 177-186.
• Klein, P.G. (2000), “New Institutional Economics”, in: Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, Eds. B. Boukeart & G de Geest, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Glos9, 456-489.
• Langlois, R.N. (1989), “The New Institutional Economics: an Introductory Essay”, in: Langlois, R.H. (Ed.), Economics as a Process, Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, 1-25.
• North, D.C. (1971), “Institutional Change and Economic Growth”, Journal of Economic History, 31, 118-125.
• North, D.C. (1981), “Structure and Change in Economic History”, New York, Journal of Economic Literature, 16, 963-978.
• North, D.C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres.
• North, D.C. (1991), “Institutions”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5: 97-112.
• North, D.C. (1995a), “The New Institutional Economics and Third World Development”, in: Harriss, Hunter and Lewis, 17-26.
• North, D.C. (1995b), “The Adam Smith Address: Economic Theory in a Dynamic Economic World”, Business Economics, 30, 7-12.
• North, D.C. (1984), “Government and The Cost of Exchange”, Journal of Economic History, 44, 255-264.
• North D.C. & W. Summerhill & W. Barry (2000), “Order, Disorder and Economic Change”, in: Governing for Prosperity, Edited by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita & Hilton Root, New Haven, CO: Yale University Press.
• Orhan, S.S. (2011), “İktisatta Yeni Yaklaşımlar”, ed. Ercan Eren & Metin Sarfati, içinde: Yerleşik İktisatta Heterodoksi: Yeni Kurumsal İktisat, İletişim Yay., 59-87.
• Orhan, S.S. (2016a), “In the New Institutional Economics Approach R. Coase and Law, D. North and Social Psychology Context: Pluralist Approach Opportunities in Economics”, Sosyoekonomi, 24(28), 189-208.
• Orhan, S.S. (2016b), Türkiye’de Kuramsal Olarak İktisadi Düşünce: İktisat Kurumunun Modernist Sosyal Bilişi, Otoriter Sosyal Temsiller ve Liberal Retorik, İletişim Yay. Basım Aşaması.
• Orhan, S.S. (2016c), “Modern Makro Uzlaşının Kayıp Ekonomi Politiği: Yerleşik Formalist, Yerleşik Kurumsal ve Yerleşik Politik Uzlaşı”, Sosyoekonomi, 24(27), 139-160.
• Parada, J. (2001), “Original Institution Economics: A Theory for 21st Century”, Oeconomicus, V, Fall 2001, 46-60.
• Parada, J. (2002), “Original Institutional Economics and New Institutional Economics: Revisiting the Bridges (Or the Divide)”, Oeconomicus, VI, Fall 2002.
• Richter, R. (2005), “The New Institutional Economics - Its Start, Its Meaning, Its Prospects 1”, Revised 9 November, 2005. An Earlier Version appeared in: The European Business Organization Law Review (EBOR), 6(2), 161-200.
• Rutheford, M. (1995), “The Old and The New Institutionalism: Can Bridges Be Built?”, Journal of Economic Issues, 29, 443-451.
• Umbeck, J. (1981), “A Theory of Formation and Initial Distribution of Property Might Makes Rights”, Economic Inquiry Journal, 19(1), 38-59.
• Williamson, O.E. (1975), The Mechanism of Governance, New York, NY. Oxford Univercity Pres.
• Williamson, O.E. (1985), The Economic Institution of Capitalism, New York et al: Free Press.
• Williamson, O.E. (2000), “The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead”, Journal of Economic Literature, 38, 595-613.
• Veblen, T. (1898a), The Theory of Leisure Class. Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions, New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1989 [1899].
• Veblen, T. (1898b), “Why is Economics not An Evolutionary Science?”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 12(4), 373-397.