IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jculte/v23y1999i3p137-146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodological Individualism and Cultural Economics

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Rushton

Abstract

This paper considers the communitarian critique of the method of economics, especially in regard to its methodological individualism, with reference in particular to cultural economics. It asks whether cultural goods can be modelled in a meaningful way under the usual assumptions in neoclassical economics about individual economic agents. Special attention is paid to Charles Taylor's critique of ''atomism'', and his suggestion that some goods are ''irreducibly social''. The implications of the critique for (1) public funding of the arts, and (2) copyright policy, are considered. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Rushton, 1999. "Methodological Individualism and Cultural Economics," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 23(3), pages 137-146, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jculte:v:23:y:1999:i:3:p:137-146
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1007556402981
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1007556402981
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1007556402981?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Rushton, 1997. "When in Rome ... Amending Canada's Copyright Act," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 23(3), pages 317-330, September.
    2. Sen, Amartya K, 1979. "Personal Utilities and Public Judgements: Or What's Wrong with Welfare Economics?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 89(355), pages 537-558, September.
    3. Michael Rushton, 1998. "The Moral Rights of Artists: Droit Moral ou Droit Pécuniaire?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 22(1), pages 15-32, March.
    4. Koboldt, Christian, 1995. "Intellectual Property and Optimal Copyright Protection," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 95-01, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    5. Landes, William M & Posner, Richard A, 1989. "An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(2), pages 325-363, June.
    6. Stigler, George J & Becker, Gary S, 1977. "De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 76-90, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lauren Haaften-Schick & Amy Whitaker, 2022. "From the Artist’s Contract to the blockchain ledger: new forms of artists’ funding using equity and resale royalties," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 46(2), pages 287-315, June.
    2. Bronwyn Coate & Robert Hoffmann, 2022. "The behavioural economics of culture," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 46(1), pages 3-26, March.
    3. Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2002. "Cultural heritage as multi-dimensional, multi-value and multi-attribute economic good: toward a new framework for economic analysis and valuation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 529-558.
    4. Clément, Valérie & Moureau, Nathalie & Vidal, Marion, 2009. "À la recherche des biens sous tutelle," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 85(4), pages 383-401, décembre.
    5. Michael Rushton, 2000. "Public Funding of Controversial Art," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 24(4), pages 267-282, November.
    6. Elodie Brahic & Valérie Clément & Nathalie Moureau & Marion Vidal, 2008. "A la recherche des Merit Goods," Working Papers 08-08, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jun 2008.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Erwin Arkenbout & Frans van Dijk & Peter van Wijck, 2004. "Copyright in the Information Society: Scenario's and Strategies," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 237-249, March.
    2. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    3. Wendy J. Gordon, 2014. "The fair use doctrine: markets, market failure and rights of use," Chapters, in: Richard Watt (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Copyright, chapter 4, pages 77-92, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. T. Randolph Beard & George S. Ford & Gilad Sorek & Lawrence J. Spiwak, 2018. "Piracy, Imitation, and Optimal Copyright Policy," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(3), pages 815-830, January.
    5. Kuklys, W. & Robeyns, I., 2004. "Sen’s Capability Approach to Welfare Economics," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0415, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    6. Koboldt, Christian, 1997. "The EU-Directive on the legal protection of databases and the incentives to update: An economic analysis," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 127-138, March.
    7. Ruth Towse, 2010. "Creativity, Copyright and the Creative Industries Paradigm," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 461-478, August.
    8. Michael Rushton, 2011. "Artists’ Rights," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse (ed.), A Handbook of Cultural Economics, Second Edition, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Paul Belleflamme & Pierre M. Picard, 2007. "Piracy and Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 351-383, June.
    10. Budzinski, Oliver & Monostori, Katalin & Pannicke, Julia, 2012. "Der Schutz geistiger Eigentumsrechte in der Welthandelsorganisation: Urheberrechte im TRIPS Abkommen und die digitale Herausforderung," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 79, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    11. Stan J. Liebowitz & Richard Watt, 2006. "How To Best Ensure Remuneration For Creators In The Market For Music? Copyright And Its Alternatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 513-545, September.
    12. Wiebke Kuklys & Ingrid Robeyns, 2004. "Sens's Capability Approach to Welfare Economics," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2004-03, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    13. Mikko Mustonen, 2005. "When Does a Firm Support Substitute Open Source Programming?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 121-139, March.
    14. Koboldt, Christian, 1996. "The EU-Directive on the Legal Protection of Databases and the Incentives to Update: An Economic Analysis," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 96-03, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    15. Michael Rushton, 1998. "The Moral Rights of Artists: Droit Moral ou Droit Pécuniaire?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 22(1), pages 15-32, March.
    16. Antoine Blanc & Isabelle Huault, 2011. "Against the Digital Revolution?," Post-Print halshs-00685464, HAL.
    17. Ruth Towse, 2008. "Why has cultural economics ignored copyright?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 32(4), pages 243-259, December.
    18. Budzinski, Oliver & Monostori, Katalin, 2012. "Intellectual property rights and the WTO," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 71, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    19. Mustonen, Mikko, 2003. "Copyleft--the economics of Linux and other open source software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 99-121, March.
    20. Alessio Emanuele Biondo & Roberto Cellini & Tiziana Cuccia, 2020. "Choices on museum attendance: An agent‐based approach," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(4), pages 882-897, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jculte:v:23:y:1999:i:3:p:137-146. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.