IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/vhsuwp/2010_107.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Das liberale Trilemma

Author

Listed:
  • Beckmann, Klaus B.

    (Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

Abstract

Gegenstand dieses Aufsatzes sind die fundamentalen Probleme liberaler Argumente in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften. Anders als dies die Zyklen in der Dogmengeschichte nahelegen, erweist sich die gegenwärtige Krise des Wirtschaftsliberalismus dabei nicht als eine vorübergehende „Rezession“, sondern als theoretischen, empirischen und publikationsökonomischen Problemen geschuldet. Ein fundamentaler Widerspruch zwischen den drei Polen einer wirtschaftsliberalen Grundüberzeugung (Einstimmigkeitsprinzip, horizontale Gerechtigkeit und wirtschaftliche Freiheit) führt bei der Begründung von Freiheit in ein Trilemma, das uns auf einen instrumentellen Ansatz verweist. Dieser jedoch sieht sich einer recht unklaren empirischen Lage gegenüber, angesichts derer besonders eine Betrachtung eines monolithischen Indikators wenig sinnvoll erscheint. Am Schluss ein kurzer, pessimistischer Absatz zu der Frage, ob denn die ordnungsökonomische Analyse solcher Fragen Aussicht auf Besserung verspricht. Angesichts der Anreize von Gutachtern argumentiere ich, dass solche Aussichten kaum bestehen.

Suggested Citation

  • Beckmann, Klaus B., 2011. "Das liberale Trilemma," Working Paper 107/2010, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:vhsuwp:2010_107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hsu-hh.de/fgvwl/index_IurT2csRUEbtSelE.html
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Theo Eicher & Wolfgang Ochel & Oliver Roehn & Anja Rohwer & Anja Hülsewig, 2008. "Institutionen und Wirtschaftswachstum in den OECD-Ländern," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 61(11), pages 28-36, June.
    2. Alberto Alesina & Andrea Ichino & Loukas Karabarbounis, 2011. "Gender-Based Taxation and the Division of Family Chores," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 1-40, May.
    3. Langlois, Richard N & Cosgel, Metin M, 1993. "Frank Knight on Risk, Uncertainty, and the Firm: A New Interpretation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(3), pages 456-465, July.
    4. Richard Layard, 2006. "Happiness and Public Policy: a Challenge to the Profession," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(510), pages 24-33, March.
    5. Pies, Ingo, 2008. "Mathematik und Ordnungspolitik sind kein Widerspruch: Aber die universitäre Zukunft der Ordnungspolitik ist selbst ein gravierendes Ordnungsproblem," Discussion Papers 2008-7, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    6. Bruno S. Frey & Margit Osterloh, 2006. "Evaluations: Hidden Costs, Questionable Benefits, and Superior Alternatives," IEW - Working Papers 302, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    7. Peter Weingart, 2005. "Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 117-131, January.
    8. Sen, Amartya Kumar, 1970. "The Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal," Scholarly Articles 3612779, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    9. Sen, Amartya, 1970. "The Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(1), pages 152-157, Jan.-Feb..
    10. Peter A. Lawrence, 2003. "The politics of publication," Nature, Nature, vol. 422(6929), pages 259-261, March.
    11. Macours, Karen & Janvry, Alain de & Sadoulet, Elisabeth, 2010. "Insecurity of property rights and social matching in the tenancy market," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(7), pages 880-899, October.
    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. Langlois, Richard N., 2002. "Modularity in technology and organization," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 19-37, September.
    2. Brenda Cheang & Chongshou Li & Andrew Lim & Zhenzhen Zhang, 2015. "Identifying patterns and structural influences in the scientific communication of business knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 159-189, April.
    3. Colander, David, 2009. "What Was “It” That Robbins Was Defining?," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 437-448, December.
    4. Antoinette Baujard, 2016. "Utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 40, pages 576-588, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Leo Katz & Alvaro Sandroni, 2020. "Limits on power and rationality," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 507-521, March.
    6. Bernholz, Peter, 1997. "Property rights, contracts, cyclical social preferences and the Coase theorem: A synthesis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 419-442, September.
    7. Alexander Kalgin & Olga Kalgina & Anna Lebedeva, 2019. "Publication Metrics as a Tool for Measuring Research Productivity and Their Relation to Motivation," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 44-86.
    8. Azam, Jean-Paul, 2008. "Macroeconomic Agenda for Fiscal Policy and Aid Effectiveness in Post-Conflict Countries," IDEI Working Papers 539, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    9. Jean Lainé & Ali Ozkes & Remzi Sanver, 2016. "Hyper-stable social welfare functions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 157-182, January.
    10. Ngo Long & Vincent Martinet, 2018. "Combining rights and welfarism: a new approach to intertemporal evaluation of social alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(1), pages 35-64, January.
    11. Bezalel Peleg, 2002. "Complete Characterization of Acceptable Game Forms by Effectivity Functions," Discussion Paper Series dp283, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    12. John A. Weymark, 2017. "Conundrums for nonconsequentialists," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 269-294, February.
    13. Bezalel Peleg & Ron Holzman, 2017. "Representations of Political Power Structures by Strategically Stable Game Forms: A Survey," Games, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Fritz W. Scharpf, 1991. "Games Real Actors Could Play: The Challenge of Complexity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 277-304, July.
    15. J González-Pachón & C Romero, 2006. "An analytical framework for aggregating multiattribute utility functions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(10), pages 1241-1247, October.
    16. Stern, Nicholas, 2014. "Ethics, equity and the economics of climate change paper 2: economics and politics," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62704, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Dimitrov, Dinko & Sung, Shao Chin & Xu, Yongsheng, 2007. "Procedural group identification," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 137-146, September.
    18. Ben McQuillin & Robert Sugden, 2011. "The representation of alienable and inalienable rights: games in transition function form," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 683-706, October.
    19. Stanley Reiter, 2001. "Interdependent Preferences and Groups of Agents," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 3(1), pages 27-67, January.
    20. Jean Mercier-Ythier, 2010. "The Aggregation of Individual Distributive Preferences through the Distributive Liberal Social Contract : Normative Analysis," Working Papers of BETA 2010-01, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Liberalismus; Freiheit; Wirtschaftswissenschaften;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics

    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:ris:vhsuwp:2010_107. 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: Klaus Bekcmann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/egbwhde.html .

    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.