How Should the History of Economic Analysis be Approached? II

Yıl 2009, Cilt: 27 Sayı: 1, 45 - 72, 01.06.2009

Hüseyin Özel

Öz

The
present paper aims at developing a classification that can distinguish among
different schools of thought in economics. For this aim in mind, two analitical
problems that could be useful to distinguish amog different schools of thought
are identified: “the coordination problem”, which seeks to explain the
emergence of equilibrium out of individual self-interested behavior; and the
“order” problem that seeks to explain the emergence of an economic and social
order that would be capable of reproducing itself smoothly and continuously.
These two problems, it is noted, are two façades of the same “problematic” of
economics, namely the “Invisible Hand”. Thus in the paper, a classification
among different schools of thought on the basis of the invisible hand
conception is developed, and the analytical problems associated with this
conception are discussed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Invisible hand, invisible backhand, evolutionary hand, coordination problem, schools of thought

İKTİSADİ ANALİZ TARİHİNE NASIL YAKLAŞMAK GEREKİR? (II)

Öz

Bu
yazı, farklı iktisadi düşünce okulları arasında bir sınıflama yapma amacı
gütmektedir. Bu amaçla, iktisadi düşünce okullarını birbirinden ayırdetmede
yarar sağlayabilecek iki analitik sorun üzerinde durulmaktadır: bireysel çıkara
dayalı davranışlar arasındaki uyumun nasıl sağlanacağına yönelik olan
“koordinasyon sorunu” ile kendi kendisini sürekli olarak ve zorlanmadan yeniden
üretme kapasitesine sahip olan bir toplumsal ve ekonomik düzenin nasıl ortaya
çıkabileceğine yönelik “düzen” sorunu. Bu iki sorun aslında, iktisadın temel
“sorunsalı” olan “Görünmez El” kavrayışının iki yüzünü göstermektedir.
Dolayısıyla, bu yazıda, farklı okullar, görünmez el anlayışı ve ona yönelik
eleştiriler bağlamında bir sınıflama içinde sunulacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Görünmez el, görünmez ters el, evrimci el, koordinasyon sorunu, düşünce okulları

Kaynakça

• Araz-Takay, B. and H. Özel (2008) “Schumpeter and the Evolutionary Economics: Three Conceptual Issues”, 12th Annual Conference of the European Society for the History of Economic Thought: Development and Transition in the History of Economic Thought, Konferans tebliğ, Prague, 15th – 17th Mayıs.
• Arrow, K. (1994) “Methodological Individualism and Social Knowledge”, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 84(2), 1-9. Arrow, K. and F. Hahn (1971) General Competitive Analysis, San Fransisco: Holden-Day.
• Audretsch, D.B, W.J. Baumol and A. E. Burke (2001) “Competition Policy in Dynamic Markets”, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19, 613-634.
• Bhaskar, R. (1975) A Realist Theory of Science, Leeds: Leeds Books.
• Bonner, J. (1986) Introduction to the Theory of Social Choice, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Bulutay, T. (1979) Genel Denge Kuramı, Ankara: SBF Yayınları.
• Caldwell, B. (1997) “Hayek and Socialism,” The Journal of Economic Literature, 35(4), 1856-1890. Caldwell, B. (2004) Hayek’s Challenge: An Intellectual Biography, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• Catephores (1994) “The Imperious Austrian: Schumpeter as Bourgeois Marxist”, New Left Review, 205 (Mayıs-Haziran), 3-30.
• Costabile, L. (2005) “Money, Cycles and Capital Formation: von Mises the ‘Austrian’ vs. Robertson the ‘Dynamist’”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29 (Şubat), 685-707.
• Desai, M. (1977) Marksist İktisat Teorisi, N. Satlıgan (Çev.), İstanbul: Birikim Yayınları.
• Dosi, G. et al. (1988) Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter Publisher.
• Ebeling, R.M. (2004) “Avusturya Okulu’nun Konjonktür Dalgalanmaları Teorisi”, Piyasa, 11 (Yaz), 121-126.
• Ebner, A. (2006) “Schumpeterian Entrepreneurship Revisited: Historical Specificity and the Phases of Capitalist Development”, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 28(3), 315-32.
• Ertürk, K. (1996) “On the Keynesian Notion of Equilibrium and Dynamics,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 20, 371-386.
• Faberberg, J. (2003) “Schumpeter and the Revival of Evolutionary Economics: An Appraisal of the Literature”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 13, 125-59.
• Foster, J. (2000) “Competitive Selection, Self-organization, and Joseph A. Schumpeter”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10, 311-328.
• Foster, J. and J.S. Metcalfe (2001) Frontiers of Evolutionary Economics, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Garrison, R. (1996) “The Austrian Theory: A Summary”, The Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle and Other Essays, Auburn, Alabama: The Mises Institute, 111-122;
• Garrison, R. (1989) “The Austrian Theory of the Business Cycle in the Light of Modern Macroeconomics”, The Review of Austrian Economics, 3(1), 4- 29.
• Glasman M. (1996) Unnecessary Suffering: Managing the Market Utopia, Londra: Verso.
• Goldstein, J.P. (1999) “The Simple Analytics and Empirics of the Cyclical Profit Squeeze and Cyclical Underconsumption Theories: Clearing the Air”, Review of Radical Political Economics¸ 31(2), 74-88.
• Gramp, W.D. (2000) “What Did Smith Mean by the Invisible Hand?”, Journal of Political Economy, 108(31), 441-465.
• Güler-Aydın, D. (2008) “Kapitalizmin İstikrarsız Doğası: K. Marx and J.A. Schumpeter’, Basılmamış Doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Günalp, B. (2004) “Devletin Ekonomideki Rolü”, Asomedya, Ocak, 54-55.
• Harcourt, G. and O.F. Hamouda (1988) “Post-Keynesianism: From Criticism to Coherence?”, Bulletin of Economic Research, 40(1), 1988, 1-33.
• Hayek, F.A. (1937) Economics and Knowledge,” Economica, Vol.4, Reprinted in Individualism and Economic Order, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1948, 33-56.
• Hayek, F.A. (1942) “Scientism and the Study of Society: Part I”, Economica, 9(35), August, 1942, 267-291.
• Hayek, F.A. (1943) "Scientism and the Study of Society, Part II”, Economica, 10(37), 34-63.
• Hayek, F.A. (1945) “The Use of Knowledge in Society”, American Economic Review, 35(4), 519-30 (tıpkıbasım: Individualism and Economic Order, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1948 içinde), 77-91.
• Hayek, F.A. (1948) Individualism and Economic Order, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Hayek, F.A. (1966) Monetary Theory and the Trade Cycle, (çev.: N. Kaldor ve H. M. Croome), New York: Kelley, 1966.
• Hayek, F.A. (1984) “Competition as a Discovery Procedure,” in C. Nishiyama and K. Leube, The Essence of Hayek, Stanford, Ca.: Hoover Institution Press, 254-265.
• Hoover, K.D. (1984) “Two Types of Monetarism”, Journal of Economic Literature, 22(1), 58-76.
• Hunt, E.K. (1981) “A Radical Critique of Welfare Economics”, Growth, Profits and Property, E. J. Nell (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hunt, E.K. (1992) History of Economic Thought: A Critical Perspective, (2. Baskı), New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
• Jacoby, R. (1975). “The Politics of the Crisis Theory: Toward the Critique of Automatic Marxism II”, Telos, 23 (Bahar), 3-52.
• Keklik, M. (2003) Schumpeter, Innovation and Growth, Long-cycle Dynamics in the Post-WWII American Manufacturing, England: Ashgate Publishing.
• Keynes, J.M. (1936) The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, London: Harcourt, Brace and World Inc.
• Keynes, J.M. (1973) “The General Theory of Employment”, in The Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes, Vol. XIV: The General Theory and After, Part II: Defence and Development, Londra, Royal Economic Society, 109-123
• Kregel, J. (1976) “Economic Methodology in the Face of Uncertainty: The Modelling Methods of Keynes and the Post-Keynesians”, Economic Journal, 86 (Haziran), 211-213.
• Marshall, A. (1920) Principles of Economics, (8th ed.)Eighth edition, London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd.,
• Marx, K. (1976) Capital (Cilt. I), (trans. by B. Fowkes), Harmondsworth: Penguin.
• Marx, K. (1981) Capital (cilt III), D. Fernbach (çev.), Harmondsworth: Penguin, 317-39.
• McDaniel, B. (2005) “A Contemporary View of Joseph A. Schumpeter’s Theory of the Entrepreneur”, Journal of Economic Issues, 39(2), 485-89.
• Metcalfe, J.S. and J. Foster (2004) Evolution and Economic Complexity, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
• Nelson, R.R. and S.G. Winter (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Özel, H. (2000) “The Explanatory Role of the General Equilibrium Theory: An Outline into a Critique of Neoclassical Economics”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 257-85.
• Özel, H. (2001) “İktisadi Analiz Tarihine Nasıl Yaklaşmak Gerekir?”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 19(2), 19-38.
• Özel, H. (2007) “The Clash of the Titans: Alternative Visions Underlying the General Theory”, Ekonomický Časopis, 55(5), 459-475. Ricardo, D. (1981) The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation; The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, I, Pierro Sraffa (ed.), London: Royal Economic Society, 119.
• Rotschild, E. (1994) “Adam Smith and the Invisible Hand”, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, Mayıs, 319-322.
• Schumpeter, J. (1911) The Theory of Economic Development, (gözden geçirilmiş baskı, 1926), Cambridge: Harvard University Press, (1911/1934).
• Schumpeter, J.A. (1928) “The Instability of Capitalism”, Economic Journal, September, 361-386, reprinted in Schumpeter, Essays on Entrepreneurs, Innovations, Business Cycles, and the Evolution of Capitalism, R. Clemence (ed.), New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1989, 47-72.
• Schumpeter, J. (1939) Busıness Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process, (Abridged ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
• Schumpeter, J. (1943) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, (5th ed.), London: George Allen and Unwin, 1976.
• Schumpeter, J. (1946) “Capitalism”, Encyclopaedia Britannica, IV, 801-807; Yeniden basım, Schumpeter, Essays on Entrepreneurs, Innovations, Business Cycles, and the Evolution of Capitalism, R. Clemence (ed.), New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1989, 189-210.
• Schumpeter, J. (1946) “Capitalism”, Encyclopaedia Britannica, IV, 801-807, reprinted in Schumpeter, Essays on Entrepreneurs, Innovations, Business Cycles, and the Evolution of Capitalism, R. Clemence (ed.), New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1989, 189-210.
• Schumpeter, J. (1947) “The Creative Response in Economic History”, Journal of Economic History, November, 149-159; Yeniden basım, Schumpeter, Essays on Entrepreneurs, Innovations, Business Cycles, and the Evolution of Capitalism, R. Clemence (ed.), New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1989, 221-231.
• Schumpeter, J.A. (2005) “Development”, Journal of Economic Literature, 43, 108-120.
• Shaikh, A. (1978) “An Introduction to the History of Crisis Theories”, U.S. Capitalism in Crisis, New York: Union of Radical Political Economists, 1978, 219.
• Smith, A. (1776) An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations, E. Cannan (ed.), The University of Chicago Press, 1976.
• Stigler, G.J. (1952)The Theory of Price, New York: Macmillan.
• Sweezy, P. (1942) The Theory of Capitalist Development, New York: Monthly Review Press.
• Tanyeri, İ. (1994) “Keynes'de Faiz Oranı, Sermayenin Marjinal Etkinliği ve Yatırım Analizi”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 12, 33-50.
• Tanyeri, İ. (1998) “Keynes’in İstihdam ve Ücret Analizi” Hacettepe Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 16(1-2), 29-46.
• Tanyeri, İ. (2000) “Adam Smith’in Rekabet Analizi Üzerine”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 18(1), 307-320.
• Tanyeri, İ. (2005) “Keynes ve Bölüşüm Analizi”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 23(1), 29-57.
• Targetti, F. and B. Kinda-Hass (1982) “Kalecki’s Review of Keynes’ General Theory,” Australian Economic Papers, December, 251-53.
• Vanberg. V. (1986) “Spontaneous Market Order and and Social Rules: A Critical Examination of F. A. Hayek’s Theory of Cultural Evolution,”, Economics and Philosophy, 2, 75-100.
• Veblen, T. (1898) “Why Is Economics not an Evolutionary Science”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 12; http://socserv2.socsci.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/veblen/econevol.txt (erişim tarihi: 20/08/2008)
• Ylikoski, P. (1995) “The Invisible Hand and Science”, Science Studies, 8, 32-43.