IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mes/challe/v54y2011i4p65-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Markets, Governments—

Author

Listed:
  • Rick Wicks

Abstract

Economic theory allows for a place for markets, and, often grudgingly, for government, but it allows no place for communities. Yet the author argues that any thorough understanding of markets—and thus of economics—requires at least a basic understanding of communities (and of governments) as well. Communities, after all, supply social benefits—they improve welfare. How can they be ignored, especially if markets (and economic thinking) undermine them? Ignoring communities has led to inadequate economic and social policies with lasting damage. The author thoroughly reviews the sometimes complex literature on the subject.

Suggested Citation

  • Rick Wicks, 2011. "Markets, Governments—," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(4), pages 65-96.
    • Handle: RePEc:mes:challe:v:54:y:2011:i:4:p:65-96
    DOI: 10.2753/0577-5132540404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2753/0577-5132540404
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2753/0577-5132540404?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. Robert H. Frank & Thomas Gilovich & Dennis T. Regan, 1993. "Does Studying Economics Inhibit Cooperation?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 159-171, Spring.
    2. Boulding, Kenneth E, 1969. "Economics as a Moral Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 1-12, March.
    3. George A. Akerlof & Rachel E. Kranton, 2000. "Economics and Identity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 715-753.
    4. George A. Akerlof, 2009. "How Human Psychology Drives the Economy and Why It Matters," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1175-1175.
    5. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226727233 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. McCloskey, Deirdre Nansen, 2006. "The Bourgeois Virtues," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226556635, October.
    7. Wicks, Rick, 2008. "A Model of Dynamic Balance among the Three Spheres of Society – Markets, Governments, and Communities – Applied to Understanding the Relative Importance of Social Capital and Social Goods," Working Papers in Economics 292, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics, revised 01 Jan 2009.
    8. Hirschman, Albert O, 1982. "Rival Interpretations of Market Society: Civilizing, Destructive, or Feeble?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 1463-1484, December.
    9. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Has Globalization Gone Too Far?," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 81-94, March.
    10. Rick Wicks, 2009. "A model of dynamic balance among the three spheres of society – markets, governments, and communities," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 36(5), pages 535-565, April.
    11. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521415019, December.
    12. Frederic Lee & Steve Keen, 2004. "The Incoherent Emperor: A Heterodox Critique of Neoclassical Microeconomic Theory," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(2), pages 169-199.
    13. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521425230, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Rick Wicks, 2012. "Assumption Without Representation: The Unacknowledged Abstraction from Communities and Social Goods," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 57(1), pages 78-95, May.
    2. Wicks, Rick, 2011. "Assumption without representation: the unacknowledged abstraction from communities and social goods," MPRA Paper 51674, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Wicks, Rick, 2008. "A Model of Dynamic Balance among the Three Spheres of Society – Markets, Governments, and Communities – Applied to Understanding the Relative Importance of Social Capital and Social Goods," Working Papers in Economics 292, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics, revised 01 Jan 2009.
    4. Grant Allan & Gioele Figus & Peter G. McGregor & J. Kim Swales, 2021. "Resilience in a behavioural/Keynesian regional model," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(4), pages 858-876, June.
    5. Hubbard, Raymond & Lindsay, R. Murray, 2013. "From significant difference to significant sameness: Proposing a paradigm shift in business research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1377-1388.
    6. 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.
    7. Peter M. Spiegler & William Milberg, 2013. "Methodenstreit 2013? Historical Perspective on the Contemporary Debate Over How to Reform Economics," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 311-345, November.
    8. Suzuki, Tomo, 2003. "The accounting figuration of business statistics as a foundation for the spread of economic ideas," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 65-95, January.
    9. Kevin D. Hoover, 2016. "The Crisis in Economic Theory: A Review Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1350-1361, December.
    10. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2011. "Economic Models as Analogies," PIER Working Paper Archive 12-001, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    11. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2013. "The Ideal Economy: A Prototype," MPRA Paper 51582, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    13. Mur, Jesús & Angulo, Ana, 2009. "Model selection strategies in a spatial setting: Some additional results," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 200-213, March.
    14. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2014. "A Model of Modeling," PIER Working Paper Archive 14-026, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    15. Miguel A. Duran, 2007. "Mathematical Needs and Economic Interpretations," Contributions to Political Economy, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 26(1), pages 1-16.
    16. Ole Røgeberg & Morten Nordberg, 2005. "A defence of absurd theories in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 543-562.
    17. Schaefer, Alexander, 2021. "Rationality, uncertainty, and unanimity: an epistemic critique of contractarianism," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 82-117, March.
    18. Joshua M. Epstein, 2007. "Agent-Based Computational Models and Generative Social Science," Introductory Chapters, in: Generative Social Science Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling, Princeton University Press.
    19. Niclas Berggren & Therese Nilsson, 2013. "Does Economic Freedom Foster Tolerance?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 177-207, May.
    20. Giuseppe Garofalo, 2014. "Irreducible complexities: from Gödel and Turing to the paradigm of Imperfect Knowledge Economics," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3463-3474, 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:mes:challe:v:54:y:2011:i:4:p:65-96. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/MCHA20 .

    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.