Search results

This paper aims to utilize a framework from classic sociology – Max Weber’s Typology of Rationality – to understand the motivations for social entrepreneurship in responsible tourism in India. The critical role of the social entrepreneur in effecting the phenomenon of social entrepreneurship has been largely under-recognized. The authors seek to explore, develop and enhance Weber’s theoretical arguments in the context of the tourism industry.

The authors used a constructivism paradigm and Seidman’s (2006) Three Interview Series technique to obtain the narratives of two social entrepreneurs in India. Data were analyzed using a hybrid thematic coding procedure.

Findings indicate that there exists a dynamic interplay between the formal and substantive rationalities that underlie the behavior of social entrepreneurs. The authors also discuss how entrepreneurs draw upon their formal and substantive repertoires to create their identities through the simultaneous processes of apposition (“Me”) and opposition (“Not Me”).

The findings provide an important recognition of the impact of formal and substantive rationalities on the conceptualization, implementation and manifestation of social enterprise for a variety of stakeholders.

This paper makes a significant contribution to understanding the why and the how of social entrepreneurship in responsible tourism. It provides a framework that can be widely applied to develop and enhance Weberian theory and further the understanding of the fundamental nature of human behavioral phenomena in tourism and beyond.

Considers a Wirkungsgeschichte of Hermann Heinrich Gossen, focusing on the reactions of the three stars of the Marginal Revolution: William Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras and Carl Menger. Although Hermann Heinrich Gossen is today known as one of the forerunners of the Marginal Revolution, it was only in 1879 that Jevons mentioned him in the second edition of the Theory of Political Economy, which contributed greatly toward making Gossen’s name known among English‐speaking readers. Later, in 1885, Walras wrote a famous article in the Journal des Economistes, entitled “Un économiste inconnu: Hermann‐Henri Gossen”. Investigates a Wirkungsgeschichte of Gossen, an ignored German mathematical economist.

The objective of this paper is to show the modernity of the approach developed by Carl Menger. The author argues that the Mengerian approach is part of a conceptual pattern composed of four interdependent, hierarchical and coherent parts (ontology, epistemology, methodology and key concepts) and that this conceptual pattern in all its originality and consistency fits perfectly within the approach of complexity. Ontologically (Section 1), the starting point is different from that of Léon Walras and William Stanley Jevons, the economy being apprehended as an open system; from an epistemological point of view (Section 2), Menger adopts a distinct conception of what constitutes a good scientific explanation, which contrasts with the Walrasian conception; methodologically (Section 3), his rejection of mathematics can therefore be understood as a consequence of his ontological and epistemological position: it is not mathematics as such that the author rejects but the functionalist tools then available, which are not adapted to his conception of economic reality; and finally the key concept (Section 4) of the author’s analysis is not that of equilibrium but an analysis of the process of exchange and production, with the emphasis placed on the emergence of organic phenomena.

Wilhelm Launhardt (1832‐1918) is a founder of mathematical economics. His main work, Mathematical Foundations of Economics, published in 1885, was translated into English in 1993. As an engineer, he contributed to the field of not only engineering, but also of economics and, in particular, to those parts in economics which can be treated fruitfully with mathematics. Launhardt developed his work independently from the French engineers, but based it squarely on the work of the agricultural engineer von Thünen. He made references to the economists Sax, Walras and Jevons. His main economic contribution lies in founding location theory but, beyond that, he contributed to the mathematical treatment of economics, labor economics, monetary economics and technology economics with a special emphasis on railway issues from a locational point of view. Hence, it is the purpose of this paper to show how Launhardt used mathematics in his engineering‐based approach to the economics of location and technology.

Whenever capitalism in the West appears to be dragging with unresolved problems, then quite a few people, including professional economists, begin to think that perhaps socialism is a better alternative. Conversely, in the East even a larger number of people, including economists (who are not activists), seriously believe that in view of their shortages and meagre incomes capitalism would be a better alternative.

As in the case of Karl Marx where the scientist (thinker in equilibrium terms) must be separated from the revolutionary (man of action, thinker in disequilibrium terms), this article, using the same equilibrium versus disequilibrium approach, advances the thesis that there are also two Walrases — the pure scientist (theoretician) and the social reformer (a man of action). There is sufficient evidence to accept the hypothesis of two Walrases and this in turn helps to explain a number of ideas which otherwise appear as contradictions.