Contributions of Institutional Economics to Economic Thought

Yıl 2022, , 52 - 64, 21.07.2022

Fazıl Kayıkçı Mustafa Kesgin

https://doi.org/10.51803/yssr.1146878

Öz

It is seen that interest in the effects of human behavior on economic events and phenomena has been increasing in recent years. In this context, institutions where behaviors become a set of formal-informal rules that determine the boundaries of choice for the stakeholders of the society from thought to action and form the framework of individual action by gaining stability, are of great importance in terms of developing an economic thinking system compatible with the real world. With its dynamic perspective on economic events and phenomena, the institutional economic tradition has revealed important discoveries by evaluating the effects of institutions on the economic order from different perspectives and closed a major gap in this area. With this study, the historical adventure of institutional economics, which started with the pioneering studies that Thorstein B. Veblen put forward based on the Darwinian evolution approach, has been discussed from the perspective of old and new institutional economics. By presenting the contributions of the prominent representatives of the tradition to economic thought through labor included in the analysis, it is aimed to open a door from the perspective of institutionalized behavior to studies on the economic impact of human behavior. In addition, the evaluations for the sustainability of the institutional tradition were discussed, and the advantages and disadvantages of the tradition in question were emphasized within the framework of today's prevailing economic approach.

Anahtar Kelimeler

institutional economics, economic thought, economic approaches

Kurumsal İktisadın İktisadi Düşünceye Katkıları

Öz

İnsan davranışlarının iktisadi olay ve olgular üzerindeki etkisine yönelik ilginin son yıllarda artarak devam ettiği görülmektedir. Bu kapsamda, davranışların istikrar kazanarak, düşünceden eyleme kadar, toplumun paydaşları için tercih sınırlarını belirleyen ve bireysel eylemin çerçevesini oluşturan formel-enformel kurallar seti halini aldığı kurumlar, gerçek dünya ile uyumlu bir iktisadi düşünce sistemi geliştirilebilmesi açısından büyük önem arz etmektedir. İktisadi olay ve olgulara yönelik dinamik bakış açısıyla kurumsal iktisadi gelenek, kurumların iktisadi düzen üzerindeki etkisini farklı açılardan değerlendirerek önemli keşifler ortaya koymuş ve bu alanda büyük bir açığı kapatmıştır. Bu çalışma ile Thorstein B. Veblen’in Darvinci evrim yaklaşımını temel alarak ortaya koyduğu öncü çalışmalarla başlayan kurumsal iktisadın tarihsel serüveni, eski ve yeni kurumsal iktisat perspektifinden ele alınmıştır. Geleneğin önde gelen temsilcilerinin kurumları analize dâhil emek suretiyle iktisadi düşünceye yapmış oldukları katkılar ortaya konularak, insan davranışlarının iktisadi etkisine yönelik çalışmalara kurumsallaşmış davranış perspektifinden de bir kapı aralanması amaçlanmıştır. Buna ek olarak kurumsal geleneğin sürdürülebilmesine yönelik değerlendirmeler ele alınmış, günümüz hâkim iktisadi yaklaşım çerçevesinde söz konusu geleneğin avantaj ve dezavantajları vurgulanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kurumsal iktisat, iktisadi düşünce, iktisadi yaklaşımlar

Kaynakça

• Ayres, C. E. (1944). The Theory of Economic Progress. The University of North Carolina Press.
• Ayres, C. E. (1952). The Industrial Economy: Its Technological Basis and Institutional Destiny.: The Riverside Press.
• Ayres, C. E. (1960). Institutionalism and Economic Development. The Southwestern Social Science Quarterly, 41(1), 45–62.
• Ayres, C. E. (1967). The Theory of Institutional Adjustment. C. C. Thompson (Ed,). Institutional Adjustment: A Challenge to a Changing Economy (pp. 1–17). San Antonio: University of Texas Press. [CrossRef]
• Ayres, C. E. (1968). Gospel of Technology. H. M. Kallen ve S. Hook (Ed,). American Philosophy Today and Tomorrow (pp. 25-42). Books for Libraries Press.
• Brette, O. (2003). Thorstein Veblen’s Theory of Institutional Change: Beyond Technological Determinism. The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 10(3), 455–477. [CrossRef]
• Coase, R. H. (1937). The Nature of the Firm. Economica, 4(16), 386–405. [CrossRef]
• Coase, R. H. (1960). The Problem of Social Cost. The Journal of Law and Economics, 3, 1–44. [CrossRef]
• Coase, R. H. (1974). The Choice of the Institutional Framework: A Comment. The Journal of Law & Economics, 17(2), 493–496. [CrossRef]
• Coase, R. H. (1992). The Institutional Structure of Production. The American Economic Review, 82(4), 713–719.
• Commons, J. R. (1919). Industrial Goodwill. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.
• Commons, J. R. (1925). The Stabilization of Prices and Business. The American Economic Review, 15(1), 43–52.
• Commons, J. R. (1934). Institutional Economics; Its Place in Political Economy. The Macmillan Company.
• Commons, J. R. (1996a). John R. Commons: Selected Essays (Cilt 1-2). (M. Rutherford & W. J. Samuels, (Ed,). Routledge.
• Commons, J. R. (1996b). Industrial Government. International Labour Review, 135(3–4), 281–286.
• Endres, A. M. (1985). Veblen and commons on Goodwill: a Case of theoretical divergence. History of Political Economy, 17(4), 637– 649. [CrossRef]
• Hodgson, G. M. (2003). Darwinism and Institutional Economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 37(1), 85–97. [CrossRef]
• Ménard, C. & Shirley, M. M. (2014). The Future of New Institutional Economics: From Early Intuitions to a New Paradigm? Journal of Institutional Economics, 10(4), 541–565. [CrossRef]
• Mitchell, W. C. (1903). A History of the Greenbacks: With Special Reference to the Economic Consequences of Their Issue (1862-65). The University of Chicago Press.
• Mitchell, W. C. (1910). The Rationality of Economic Activity. Journal of Political Economy, 18(3), 197–216.
• Mitchell, W. C. (1913). Business Cycles. University of California Press. [CrossRef]
• Mitchell, W. C. (1966). Business Cycles: The Problem and Its Setting (19. b.). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
• Mitchell, W. C., King, W. I., Macaulay, F. R. & Knauth, O. W. (1921). Income in the United States: Its Amount and Distribution (1909-1919). New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
• Myrdal, K. G. (1967). Adjustment of Economic Institutions in Contemporary America: The Trends of Changes Now Underway. C. C. Thompson (Ed,). Institutional Adjustment: A Challenge to a Changing Economy (pp. 70–84). University of Texas Press. [CrossRef]
• Myrdal, K. G. (1973a). Growth and Social Justice. World Development, 1(3-4), 119–120. [CrossRef]
• Myrdal, K. G. (1973b). Crises and cycles in the development of economics. The Political Quarterly, 44(1), 9–21.
• Myrdal, K. G. (1973c). Equity and growth. World Development, 1(11), 43–47. [CrossRef]
• Myrdal, K. G. (1978). Institutional Economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 12(4), 771-783. [CrossRef]
• Myrdal, K. G. (1989). The Equality Issue in World Development. The American Economic Review, 79(6), 8-17.
• North, D. C. (1986). The New Institutional Economics. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 142(1), 230–237.
• North, D. C. (1990). A Transaction Cost Theory of Politics. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2(4), 355–367. [CrossRef]
• North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Ekonomic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112. [CrossRef]
• North, D. C. (1992). Transaction Costs, Institutions, and Economic Performance. International Center for Economic Growth.
• North, D. C. (1994). Economic Performance Through Time. The American Economic Review, 84(3), 359–368.
• North, D. C. (2010). Kurumlar, Kurumsal Değişim ve Ekonomik Performans (2 b.). (G. Çağalı Güven, Çev.) Sabancı Üniversitesi.
• Rutherford, M. (2001). Institutional Economics: Then and Now. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(3), 173–194. [CrossRef]
• Samuels, W. J. (1969). On the Future of Institutional Economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 3(3), 67–72. [CrossRef]
• Tilman, R. (1983). Some Recent Interpretations of Thorstein Veblen's Theory of Institutional Change. Journal of Economic Issues, 21(2), 683–690. [CrossRef]
• Veblen, T. B. (1898a). Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 12(4), 373–397. [CrossRef]
• Veblen, T. B. (1898b). The Instinct of Workmanship and the Irksomeness of Labor. American Journal of Sociology, 4(2), 187–201. [CrossRef]
• Veblen, T. B. (1905). Credit and Prices. Journal of Political Economy, 13(3), 460–472. [CrossRef]
• Veblen, T. B. (1921). The Engineers and the Price System. B. W. Huebsch, Inc.
• Veblen, T. B. (1925). Economic Theory in the Calculable Future. The American Economic Review, 15(1), 48-55.
• Veblen, T. B. (2016). Aylak Sınıfın Teorisi (E. Kırmızıaltın & H. Bilir, Çev.) Ankara: Heretik Yayınları.
• Williamson, O. E. (1971). The Vertical Integration of Production: Market Failure Considerations. The American Economic Review, 61(2), 112–123.
• Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261. [CrossRef]
• Williamson, O. E. (1988). Technology and Transaction Cost Economics. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 10(3), 355–363. [CrossRef]
• Williamson, O. E. (2005). The Economics of Governance. The American Economic Review, 95(2), 1–18. [CrossRef]
• Williamson, O. E. (2010). Transaction Cost Economics: The Origins. Journal of Retailing, 86(3), 227–231. [CrossRef]