Search results

Nobody concerned with political economy can neglect the history of economic doctrines. Structural changes in the economy and society influence economic thinking and, conversely, innovative thought structures and attitudes have almost always forced economic institutions and modes of behaviour to adjust. We learn from the history of economic doctrines how a particular theory emerged and whether, and in which environment, it could take root. We can see how a school evolves out of a common methodological perception and similar techniques of analysis, and how it has to establish itself. The interaction between unresolved problems on the one hand, and the search for better solutions or explanations on the other, leads to a change in paradigma and to the formation of new lines of reasoning. As long as the real world is subject to progress and change scientific search for explanation must out of necessity continue.

This article does not pretend to represent an exhaustive survey of all the differences and similarities existing between Joseph Schumpeter and his fellow Austrians. To have carried out such a task would have required a detailed knowledge of the literature which was beyond that of the present writer. Instead, what is offered here is a particular interpretation of the major characteristics of Austrian economics, the relationship of Schumpeter to these, together with some fragmentary evidence in support of the views expressed. The article begins with a brief resumé of the leading personalities of the Austrian School of Economics. In the second section the suggestion that Schumpeter was not a true member of the Austrian School is examined. It is shown that the minor differences which did exist between Schumpeter and his colleagues on technical questions are more than outweighed by agreement on the substantive issues of their economic analysis. The third section deals with the attitudes of the Austrian School to questions of method while the remaining sections deal with the classical tradition in the theory of economic growth.

This manuscript discusses the contributions of Peter F. Drucker and the seminal influences on his logic made by the Austrian School of Economics. According to our research, Drucker focused on four critical elements of the Austrian School: an interdisciplinary approach and philosophical sophistication; the vision of market competition as an endless dynamic process (creative destruction, entrepreneurship); the firm as a social entity and as a depository of knowledge; and the role of the government. The research also suggests that Peter Drucker's prolific legacy has significantly influenced modern management theory and practice through its grounding in Austrian School logic.

Austrian views on money and the gold standard are consonant with the general characteristics of the school. First, Austrians are concerned with the complete picture, with how a whole economic system and alternative sets of institutions function. They are alert to the question of unplanned order and of how the decentralised decisions and specialised activities of millions of people can mesh without central planning. They investigate how the market and prices function as a vast communications system and computer, transmitting information and incentives and so enlisting knowledge scattered over many millions of minds that would otherwise necessarily go to waste. They recognise why accurate economic calculation is impossible under socialism. Second, the Austrians appreciate the implications of incomplete, imperfect and scattered knowledge and also the implications of change and unpredictability in human affairs. They pay attention to disequilibrium, to processes as well as end positions, and to entrepreneurial altertness and creativity. Instead of supposing, for example, that cost curves and demand curves are somehow “given” to business decision makers, they recognise it as one of the functions of the competitive process to press for discovery of ways to get the cost curves down — if one speaks of such curves at all. Third, Austrians have certain methodological predilections. They reject the tacit view of economic activity as the result of interplay among objective conditions and impersonal forces. They take pains to trace their analyses back to the subjective perceptions, decisions and actions of individuals trying to cope with a complex and unpredictably changeable world; they recognise introspection as one legitimate source of the facts underpinning economic theory. (While thus practising methodological individualism, they do not subordinate the big question of system‐wide co‐ordination to an excessively narrow focus on the administration of individual firms and households.) Finally, although Austrians like to think of their economics as value‐free and not logically tied to any particular policy position, their insights into positive economics, coupled with plausible value judgements of a humanitarian and individualistic nature, undeniably do lead them to favour free markets.

Menger′s Grundsätze is explored; the Aristotelian background of the discourse is probed, as is the problematic image of Menger sketched in the secondary literature as soon as it is confronted with this Aristotelanism and with the subjective value theory and the motif of time, error and uncertainty. The conflicting elements of this picture are pieced together.

This purpose of this paper is to introduce property researchers to the principles of Austrian economics and to consider their methodological relevance and potential for understanding the dynamics of property market processes.

This paper sets out the basic principles of the Austrian economics thesis, including an outline of the entrepreneurial discovery approach to market processes, a core precept of the Austrian thesis. It then relates the core assumptions of the Austrian school to the workings of the property market.

It is argued that the driving force of property market process is provided by the entrepreneurial and profit-seeking speculative activities of human agents as they are confronted with incomplete information in an uncertain property market context. Thus, Austrian economics offers a sound and practical alternative theoretical approach to the study of property market, which places the market within its socio-economic context.

In-depth examination of the provisions, assumptions, philosophical orientation and limitations of the Austrian tradition of economic thought toward a better understanding of the workings of the property market.

Using recent literature, examines developments in seven macroeconomic schools of thought: orthodox Keynesian, monetarist, new classical, real business cycle theory, new Keynesian, Austrian and post‐Keynesian. Describes all of these and classifies them as orthodox, new or radical. After setting out the differences, discusses the degree of agreement between the schools of thought. Concludes that macroeconomics is constantly evolving, resulting in new disagreements requiring a new consensus.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how research on the intersection of public policy and entrepreneurship has been bounded by its static approach and how a processual analysis based on Austrian economics can advance the understanding of the subject matter.

Rooted in the Austrian school of economics, this conceptual paper adopts a processual approach in order to unveil the effects that public policy exerts upon entrepreneurship and the market process.

The authors argue that by interfering with the market process, public policy detrimentally alters what otherwise would have been the market's natural evolution reflecting acting individuals' subjective valuations. It causes progressively self-reinforcing market distortions which result in comparatively lower levels of both capital accumulation and societal wealth.

The paper urges future research to rethink public policy's effects on entrepreneurship and to explore them more comprehensively, utilizing market process analysis.

This research suggests that public policy can never be neutral but necessarily comes with distortive and often detrimental effects. That is, public policy comes at the innate expense of hampering the entrepreneurial process. Thus, new public policies and those already in place should be carefully reconsidered in light of these effects.

This paper offers a novel take on how to best understand the effects public policy has on entrepreneurship and the market process.

The Austrian school developed a specific kind of economic analysis. Mises′ place in this school of thought and his praxeological point of view is discussed. His philosophical stance and its methodological implications are then considered.

Suppose that an isolated colonist has just reaped his grain crop. The yield is five full sacks. He destines each sack for a specific purpose: the first sackful of grain must serve him to survive, the second one to keep him in full strength, the third will serve as fodder for his poultry, enabling him to enrich his diet with meat. He plans to use the fourth for distilling corn brandy, a luxury to him. For lack of better he destines the fifth sackful of grain for feeding his parrots: their antics amuse him. So, unmistakably, the five uses are of diminishing importance to him.