Search results

In Austria the 1930s constituted the final period of success and failure of the Austrian school, ending with its emigration to the United States. This chapter focuses on this period, when the Austrian economy was hardest hit by the Great Depression, and it examines the ways and means by which the Austrian economists attempted to influence economic policy. In particular, from 1932 to 1934 in a concerted effort Austrian economists like Ludwig Mises, Fritz Machlup, and especially Oskar Morgenstern tried to “educate” the Austrian public and policy-makers in the benefits of a liberal approach towards the crisis. This effort included the advocacy of the policies typically associated with the gold standard, that is, stable money, balanced budgets, the absence of exchange restrictions, and free trade. In the actual situation the outcome of these endeavors was futile, if not harmful, insofar as indeed Austrian economic policy slowly converted to the implied deflationary stance of monetary and fiscal policy. Yet, under the regime of the so-called corporate state the necessary complement of such policies, namely the flexibility of prices and the furthering of competition, could not be accomplished. This eventual failure of the liberal cause may be ascribed to the fact that it had to rely on shifting coalitions and fragile personal relations, which in the end turned out too weak for sustaining the policies envisioned by the Austrian economists.

During the last years of his life, the mathematician Karl Menger worked on a biography of his father, the economist and founder of the Austrian School of Economics, Carl Menger. The younger Menger never finished the work. While working in the Menger collections at Duke University’s David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, we discovered draft chapters of the biography, a valuable source of information given that relatively little is known about Carl Menger’s life nearly a hundred years after his death. The unfinished biography covers Carl Menger’s family background and his life through early 1889. In this chapter, the authors discuss the biography and the most valuable new insights it provides into Carl Menger’s life, including Carl Menger’s family, his childhood, his student years, his time working as a journalist and newspaper editor, his early scientific career, and his relationship with Crown Prince Rudolf.

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.

Introduction: The liberalization tendency in the economic system of most countries in the world exists in the last years. Our last research proves that in most cases liberalism gives a positive effect on social-economic development (including pension system). However, constructive potential of economic liberalism is not everlasting, it means, first at some stages there is a certain end for the liberalization of the economy. Secondly, after a certain level (before the last level) liberalism may bring out an imminent shortage (the market sinister) in the free market in a destructive way. That is why one of the essential (and very difficult) duties of economic science is to define effective ranges of liberalism (accordingly, government regulation) for each certain country during a specific time frame. One of the differences of the pension system from other social protected chains is that this system is capable to liberalize. Is it possible to measure the degree of the government regulation of the pension system? Unfortunately, this chapter has revealed that there is no such methodology. The author has created a methodology for the first time that allows to measure the degree of government regulation in the pension system. This methodology is called the Index of Liberalism (Dirigisme) of Pension System (IL(D)PS). By calculating IL(D)PS, the author finds out that the regulation degree (interval) of the pension system. Measurement of the degree of government regulation in the pension system allows evaluating the social consequences of the implemented reforms. IL(D)PS has been calculated on the basis of four indicators: (i) ratio of the private pension assets (%GDP); (ii) ratio of the public pension expenditures (%GDP); (iii) social security tax rates for employers; and (iv) restrictions for investment of the pension funds. At the initial stage IL(D)PS has been calculated for 31 countries. Among 31 countries, there are developed, emerging, post-socialist countries and countries known for their revolutionary reforms in the pension system. According to IL(D)PS, the most dirigiste (leftness) countries are France (0.868), Greece (0.732), Italy (730) and Azerbaijan (0.704). According to the IL(D)PS, the most liberal (rightness) countries are Australia (0.208), Denmark (0.223), the Netherlands (0.231) and Canada (0.237). In Azerbaijan, pension provision is under governmental monopoly (extreme dirigiste system). The private pension system in Azerbaijan has not been formed yet. Azerbaijan has a certain degree of liberalization of the pension system. Aim: The author wants to measure the degree of the government regulation in the pension system. Method: The author have performed correlation, analytical-statistical and cross-country analyze. Findings: The degree of the government regulation in the pension system has been measured in 31 countries.

Telecommunications comprises a vital component of information infrastructures and services, with a historically strong public interest dimension. For the best part of 30 years, the telecommunications sector in Europe has been the subject of a radical reorganisation in structural and operational terms along the lines of neo‐liberalism. This paper aims to analyse the significance of the neo‐liberal project in telecommunications in respect of the related dimensions of ideology and practice.

The paper presents a public policy critique of the manifestation of neo‐liberalism in the telecommunications sector in the European Union, employing desk‐based research on relevant primary and secondary source documentation.

The paper finds that proponents of neo‐liberalism have been able to secure the broad acceptance of neo‐liberalism as a “view of the world” for telecommunications. It shows that in practice, however, the neo‐liberal model in telecommunications provides evidence of a less than efficacious adoption process in three respects: neo‐liberalism requires an elaborately managed system the regulatory burden of which has been under‐emphasised; the normative success of neo‐liberalism has masked how difficult it has actually proven to be to create competition; the preoccupation with markets and competition has resulted in de‐emphasis of public interest issues in telecommunications.

This paper contributes up‐to‐date knowledge of the nature and effects of neo‐liberalism in the European telecommunication sector. It provides a challenge and counterweight to the “received wisdom” that neo‐liberalism has been an overwhelmingly successful approach to the re‐ordering of European telecommunications.

The papers collected here were written for the second biennial Wirth conference on Austrian Economics. The Wirth Institute for Austrian and Central European Studies sponsored the conference in cooperation with the University of Toronto in Mississauga. The conference was held from 17 to 18 October 2008 in Mississauga. The Wirth Institute has a natural home in Edmonton on the campus of the University of Alberta, which is a leading center for Central European Studies. The fact that the Institute has received support not only from government of Austria, but also from the governments of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia reflects its historically minded recognition of the unique intellectual milieu of the Habsburg Empire. This intellectual milieu lasted beyond the breakup of the empire right through to the Anschluss in 1938. It is this milieu that shaped the Austrian school of economics and helped shape the context for the conference.

Describes the development of the Austrian university system 1875‐1914. German influence was detrimental to Austrian universities′ hopes for improving standards, higher status and autonomy. German scholarship was linked with German nationalism – increasing conflict between German‐speaking and non‐Germanspeaking institutions in Austria. German scholarship commanded high respect and German universities attracted professors away. University expansion created a market for professors and the Austrian universities were at a disadvantage.

In the “shareholder primacy” (SP) view of the modern corporation, shareholders are endowed with ownership rights over the corporation. This view stems from the property rights and agency theories of the business firm formulated by financial and business economists in the 1970s and 1980s, which subsequently fed into US corporate law debates. It relies on positive legal assumptions that have largely been debunked by legal scholars, and on normative economic ideas that are equally problematic. However, SP is still very influential – if not the dominant paradigm of corporate governance, especially in the United States. The goal of the present study is to come back to the theoretical debates around the foundations of the SP paradigm to seek to identify key ideational properties that may explain, in part, the resilience of such paradigm in policy, scholarship and business practice. In particular, this paper proposes that one important reason for the persistence of the SP ideology lies in the latter’s foundation on the radically contingent nature of shareholders’ claims over the corporation.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of the War on two prominent academic liberal historians.

The research is based on a narrative of their lives and careers before and during the War.

The findings include an analysis of how the War engaged these academic liberals in the pursuit of the War effort.

By the end of the War, both sought to reaffirm much of their earlier academic liberalism despite the political and social changes in the post-war world.