Search results

The paper provides a detailed historical account of Douglass C. North's early intellectual contributions and analytical developments in pursuing a Grand Theory for why some countries are rich and others poor.

The author approaches the discussion using a theoretical and historical reconstruction based on published and unpublished materials.

The systematic, continuous and profound attempt to answer the Smithian social coordination problem shaped North's journey from being a young serious Marxist to becoming one of the founders of New Institutional Economics. In the process, he was converted in the early 1950s into a rigid neoclassical economist, being one of the leaders in promoting New Economic History. The success of the cliometric revolution exposed the frailties of the movement itself, namely, the limitations of neoclassical economic theory to explain economic growth and social change. Incorporating transaction costs, the institutional framework in which property rights and contracts are measured, defined and enforced assumes a prominent role in explaining economic performance.

In the early 1970s, North adopted a naive theory of institutions and property rights still grounded in neoclassical assumptions. Institutional and organizational analysis is modeled as a social maximizing efficient equilibrium outcome. However, the increasing tension between the neoclassical theoretical apparatus and its failure to account for contrasting political and institutional structures, diverging economic paths and social change propelled the modification of its assumptions and progressive conceptual innovation. In the later 1970s and early 1980s, North abandoned the efficiency view and gradually became more critical of the objective rationality postulate. In this intellectual movement, North's avant-garde research program contributed significantly to the creation of New Institutional Economics.

Given managerial choices and the sociocultural context in which they are made are at the heart of management history, then an understanding of both is critical. This paper argues that the “late” North (2005) provides such an understanding.

This study is a research review synthesizing much disparate but cognate literature across the new institutionalism in organizational sociology/studies and in economics.

“Late” North (2005) provides an important ontological frame for dealing with the so-called “paradox of embedded agency”, an approach that may afford management historians a more thorough account of how institutions are formed and change over time. North has always maintained that institutional change is the outcome of deliberate or intentional choices made by actors. However, and unlike his earlier work which ignores how humans come to make the said choices, North (2005) explicates the sociocognitive process by which intentionality emerges with expanded consciousness, as humans construct ideas and beliefs about reality, beliefs that shape decisions to alter the said reality via the process of institutional change.

It is rather curious that despite North’s status as a “historian”, management historians – or at least those publishing in this journal from its founding in 1995 – do not seem to be terribly interested in North’s work. Although North rates a mention in rival journals, other than Dagnino and Quattrone’s (2006) study, papers in this journal invoking institutional theory align with the new institutionalism in organizational sociology/studies (NIOS) rather than North’s new institutional economics (NIE). Even in the related sub-discipline of business history, those professing an interest in institutions are more interested in the NIE of non-historians Coase and Oliver Williamson than they are in North’s NIE. And, in recent work analysing the place and significance of institutional theory in historical research, the foundations are unmistakeably NIOS rather than North’s NIE.

The purpose of this paper is to examine empirically whether economic freedom affects entrepreneurial activity in three groups of countries, classified according to economic development.

Data on the index of entrepreneurial activity cover the period between 2002 and 2009, and are taken from the annual GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor) reports and from the Index of Economic Freedom published by The Heritage Foundation from 1995 to 2009. The same analysis is carried out, grouping the countries by development level, following the classification included in the Global Competitiveness Report 2009‐2010. A Ridge regression analysis is performed to measure the model's goodness‐of‐fit and to determine equations that can be used for future predictions.

The results obtained in the correlation analysis show that economic freedom is closely related to entrepreneurial activity. The results suggest that TEA rates, opportunity‐TEA rates and necessity‐TEA rates decrease when there is an increase in economic freedom in a country, as just two of the areas analyzed – i.e. “government size” and “fiscal freedom” – appear to foster the emergence of new entrepreneurs. When countries are grouped by level of economic development, the results for countries belonging to the “Innovation‐Driven Economies” group show that the opportunity‐TEA rates increase as the economic freedom index grows.

The study indicates that entrepreneurship by opportunity increases in the group of Innovation‐Driven Economies with smaller “government size” and more “fiscal freedom”.

In order to answer this question, it will first be necessary to distinguish between political and economic correctness on the one hand, and then between Austrian and mainstream economics on the other.

In the view of most economists, highways and streets are “public goods,” not amenable to ordinary market competition. The present papers argues, to the contrary, that these thoroughfares are conducive to competitiveness, and then applies these insights to automobile insurance and price controls.

Interest in developing institutional explanations of political and economic behavior has blossomed among social scientists since the early 1980s. Three intellectual perspectives are now prevalent: rational choice theory, historical institutionalism and a new school of organizational analysis. This paper summarizes, compares and contrasts these views and suggests ways in which cross‐fertilization may be achieved. Particular attention is paid to how the insights of organizational analysis and historical institutionalism can be blended to provide fruitful avenues of research and theorizing, especially with regard to the production, adoption, and mobilization of ideas by decision makers.

This paper aims to unravel the impact of post-pandemic COVID-19 on foreign direct investment (FDI) and its determinants in the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Countries.

The study utilized four macroeconomic variables includes growth domestic product growth rate (GDPG), inflation rate (IR), exchange rate (ER), and unemployment rate (UR) to assess their impact on post-pandemic FDI, along with two variables control of corruption (CC) and political stability (PS) to measure the influence of good governance. Random effects, fixed effects, cluster random effects, cluster fixed effects and generalized method of moments (GMM) models were applied to a balanced panel dataset comprising eight SAARC countries over the period 2010–2021. To identify the random trend component in each variable, three renowned unit root tests (Levin, Lin and Chu LLC, Im-Pesaran-Shin IPS and Augmented Dickey-Fuller ADF) were used, and co-integration associations between variables were verified through the Pedroni and Kao approaches. Data analysis was performed using STATA 17 software.

The major findings revealed that the variables have an order of integration at the first difference I (1). Nonetheless, this situation suggests the possibility of a long-term link between the series. And the main results of the findings show that the coefficients of GDPG, CC and PS are positive and significant in the long run, showing that these variables boosted FDI inflows in the SAARC region as they are significantly positively linked to FDI inflows. Similarly, the coefficients of UR, IR, ER and COVID-19 are negative and significant.

By identifying the specific impacts of the post-pandemic FDI and its determinants, governments and policymakers can formulate targeted policies and measures to mitigate the adverse effects and enhance investment attractiveness. Additionally, investors can gain a deeper understanding of the risk factors and adapt their strategies accordingly, ensuring resilience and sustainable growth. Finally, this paper adds value to the literature on the post-pandemic impact on FDI inflows in the SAARC region.

This paper is the first attempt to trace the impact of COVID-19 on Foreign Direct Investment and its determinants in the SAARC Countries. Most of the previous studies were analytical in nature and, if empirical, excluded some countries due to the unviability of the data set. This study includes all the SAARC member countries, and all variables' data are completely available. There is still a lack of empirical studies related to the SAARC region; this study attempts to fill the gap.