IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ise/isegwp/wp012019.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why Economics Must be an Evolutionary Science

Author

Listed:
  • Vicente Ferreira

Abstract

This paper addresses the evolution of evolutionary thought in economics as an alternative to the dominant static view of the economy. A short history of the earlier institutional approach, announced by Thorstein Veblen’s 1898 paper ‘Why is economics not an evolutionary science?’, is presented alongside a discussion of its key methodological and philosophical aspects. Veblen’s critiques of neoclassical economics are also discussed. Then the role of evolutionary concepts in economics throughout the twentieth century is analysed, from later institutionalists to recent complexity and chaos theories. It is argued complexity approaches are developed in line with Veblen’s institutional theory, and may be incorporated in an evolutionary theoretical framework which constitutes a necessary alternative to the neoclassical paradigm, as it better describes and studies real-world socio-economic phenomena.

Suggested Citation

  • Vicente Ferreira, 2019. "Why Economics Must be an Evolutionary Science," Working Papers Department of Economics 2019/01, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    • Handle: RePEc:ise:isegwp:wp012019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://depeco.iseg.ulisboa.pt/wp/wp012019.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thorstein Veblen, 1909. "The Limitations of Marginal Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(9), pages 620-620.
    2. Malcolm Rutherford, 2001. "Institutional Economics: Then and Now," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 173-194, Summer.
    3. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    4. Veblen, Thorstein, 1904. "Theory of Business Enterprise," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number veblen1904.
    5. Francisco Louçã & Mark Perlman (ed.), 2000. "Is Economics an Evolutionary Science?," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1897.
    6. G. Hodgson, 2007. "What Are Institutions?," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 8.
    7. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 1999. "Evolution and Institutions," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1481.
    8. Veblen, Thorstein, 1909. "The Limitations of Marginal Utility," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 17.
    9. J. M. Clark, 1918. "Economics and Modern Psychology: II," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 136-136.
    10. Marc Lavoie, 1992. "Foundations of Post-Keynesian Economic Analysis," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 275.
    11. Dieter Bögenhold & Panayotis G. Michaelides & Theofanis Papageorgiou, 2021. "Schumpeter, Veblen, and Bourdieu on Institutions and the Formation of Habits," Springer Books, in: Neglected Links in Economics and Society, chapter 0, pages 233-259, Springer.
    12. Malcolm Rutherford, 2000. "Institutionalism Between the Wars," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(2), pages 291-303, June.
    13. Mirowski, Philip, 1984. "Physics and the 'Marginalist Revolution.'," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 8(4), pages 361-379, December.
    14. Veblen, Thorstein, 1898. "The Instinct of Workmanship and the Irksomeness of Labor," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 4.
    15. J. Barkley Rosser, 1999. "On the Complexities of Complex Economic Dynamics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 169-192, Fall.
    16. Hodgson, Geoffrey M, 1998. "On the Evolution of Thorstein Veblen's Evolutionary Economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 22(4), pages 415-431, July.
    17. Malcolm Rutherford, 1984. "Thorstein Veblen and the Processes of Institutional Change," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 331-348, Fall.
    18. Geoffrey Hodgson, 2010. "Choice, habit and evolution," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 1-18, January.
    19. J. Maurice Clark, 1917. "Business Acceleration and the Law of Demand: A Technical Factor in Economic Cycles," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(3), pages 217-217.
    20. Thorstein Veblen, 1898. "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 12(4), pages 373-397.
    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. Tamila Arnania-Kepuladze, 2014. "Institutions: Uncertainty In Definition Of The Term. A Brief Look At The History: 1890-1930," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 9(4), pages 79-102, December.
    2. Tae-Hee Jo, 2021. "A Veblenian Critique of Nelson and Winter’s Evolutionary Theory," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(4), pages 1101-1117, October.
    3. Naoise McDonagh, 2021. "Credit Guidance for a Desired Economy: An Original Institutional Economics Critique of Financialization," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 53(4), pages 675-693, December.
    4. Angela Ambrosino & Paolo Silvestri, 2020. "Hodgson: An Institution Across Disciplinary Barriers," Annals of the Fondazione Luigi Einaudi. An Interdisciplinary Journal of Economics, History and Political Science, Fondazione Luigi Einaudi, Torino (Italy), vol. 54(2), pages 329-348, December.
    5. Essiane, Patrick-Nelson Daniel, 2020. "De l'Ancienne Economie Institutionnelle à la Nouvelle Economie Institutionnelle: une introduction à quelques débats [Old Institutional Economics and New Institutional Economics: an Introduction to ," MPRA Paper 102858, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Dieter Bögenhold & Panayotis G. Michaelides & Theofanis Papageorgiou, 2021. "Schumpeter, Veblen, and Bourdieu on Institutions and the Formation of Habits," Springer Books, in: Neglected Links in Economics and Society, chapter 0, pages 233-259, Springer.
    7. Valentinov, Vladislav, 2023. "Stakeholder theory: Toward a classical institutional economics perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88.
    8. Blind, Georg, 2015. "Behavioural rules: Veblen, Nelson-Winter, Oström and beyond," MPRA Paper 66866, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Atsebi, Jean-Marc Bédhat & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, Ada, 2019. "Relative Deprivation in Tanzania," IZA Discussion Papers 12719, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Atsebi, Jean-Marc Bédhat & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, Ada, 2022. "Relative deprivation in Tanzania: Relative concerns and empathy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 389-408.
    11. Scrieciu, S. Şerban & Barker, Terry & Ackerman, Frank, 2013. "Pushing the boundaries of climate economics: critical issues to consider in climate policy analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 155-165.
    12. Alexander Lenger, 2018. "Shared Mental Models and Habitus Towards a Mentality-Driven Economics," Journal of Contextual Economics (JCE) – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 138(1), pages 31-51.
    13. Vladislav Valentinov, 2023. "Stakeholder Theory: Toward a Classical Institutional Economics Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88, November.
    14. Theofanis Papageorgiou & Ioannis Katselidis & Panayotis G. Michaelides, 2013. "Schumpeter, Commons, and Veblen on Institutions," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(5), pages 1232-1254, November.
    15. Adem LEVENT, 2016. "Power, Market and Techno-Structure in John Kenneth Galbraith’s Thought," Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, KSP Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 214-218, June.
    16. Tae-Hee Jo, 2016. "What If There Are No Conventional Price Mechanisms?," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 327-344, April.
    17. Joseph Keneck Massil, 2016. "Institutions, théories du changement institutionnel et déterminant de la qualité des institutions: les enseignements de la littérature économique," Working Papers hal-04141607, HAL.
    18. Alessandro Morselli, 2022. "An Institutionalist-Conventionalist Approach to the Process of Economic Change," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 4, pages 411-428.
    19. Muñoz, Félix & Encinar, María Isabel & Fernández-de-Pinedo, Nadia, 2014. "Intentionality and technological and institutional change: Implications for economic development," Working Papers in Economic Theory 2014/04, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain), Department of Economic Analysis (Economic Theory and Economic History).
    20. Angela Ambrosino, 2017. "The Role of Agents’ Propensity toward Conformity and Independence in the Process of Institutional Change," STOREPapers 1_2017, Associazione Italiana per la Storia dell'Economia Politica - StorEP.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ise:isegwp:wp012019. 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: Vitor Escaria (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://aquila.iseg.ulisboa.pt/aquila/departamentos/EC .

    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.