Wie viel Geschichte braucht die Ökonomie? Das Verhältnis von Theorie und Geschichte in evolutionstheoretischer InterpretationHow Much History Does Economics Need? Theory and History in an Evolutionary Perspective

Economic History and History of Economic Thought haven been relegated increasingly from the teaching and research curricula of economics in recent years. The paper starts off arguing that this trend is due to the mechanistic ontology of mainstream economics, and it continues setting out an alternative evolutionary ontology expounding how the historical element must and can be integrated into the body of economic theory. Centre stage is a lingua franca composed of analytical terms that are designed to bridge the domains of theoretical and of historical economic analysis. Economists are viewed in their status as observers whose cognitive dispositions as well as social behaviour co-evolve with the environment they inhabit. Further advances in economic theory are seen as being critically dependent on employing an evolutionary approach and on establishing a communication link to economic history and the history of economic thought which likewise may get essential inspirations from applying that approac

The economic agent as rule maker and rule user: Homo Sapiens Oeconomicus

Abstract.: The paper discusses the micro foundations of evolutionary economics, introducing a unified concept of the economic agent as a rule maker and rule user. Based on recent findings of the neuronal, cognitive and behavioral sciences, Homo Sapiens Oeconomicus emerges as an alternative to Homo Oeconomicus. A taxonomy of rules distinguishing between cognitive, behavioral and blueprint rules and a set of theoretical propositions related to the structure and evolution of those rules are suggeste

The origins of meso economics: Schumpeter's legacy and beyond

The paper starts from Schumpeter's proposition that entrepreneurs carry out innovations (the micro level), that swarms of followers imitate them (meso) and that, as a consequence, ‘creative destruction' leads to economic development ‘from within' (macro). It is argued that Schumpeter's approach can be developed into a new—more general—micro-meso-macro framework in economics. Center stage is meso. Its essential characteristic is bimodality, meaning that one idea (the generic rule) can be physically actualized by many agents (a population). Ideas can relate to others, and, in this way, meso constitutes a structure component of a ‘deep' invisible macro structure. Equally, the rule actualization process unfolds over time—modelled in the paper as a meso trajectory with three phases of rule origination, selective adoption and retention—and here meso represents a process component of a visible ‘surface' structure. The macro measure with a view to the appropriateness of meso components is generic correspondence. At the level of ideas, its measure is order; at that of actual relative adoption frequencies, it is generic equilibrium. Economic development occurs at the deep level as transition from one generic rule to another, inducing a change of order, and, at the surface level, as the new rule is adopted, destroying an old equilibrium and establishing a new on

Zur Neubestimmung von Geschichte und Theoriegeschichte in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften: Ko-evolution von Wirtschaftsbeobachtung und Wirtschaftswirklichkeit

Economic History and the History of Economic Thought haven been relegated increasingly from the teaching and research curricula of economics in recent years. The paper starts off arguing that this trend is due to the mechanistic ontology of mainstream economics, and it continues setting out an alternative evolutionary ontology expounding how the historical element must and can be integrated into the body of economic theory. Centre stage is a lingua franca composed of analytical terms that are designed to bridge the domains of theoretical and of historical economic analysis. Economists are viewed in their status as observers whose cognitive dispositions as well as social behaviour co-evolve with the environment they inhabit. Further advances in economic theory are seen as being critically dependent on employing an evolutionary approach and on establishing a communication link to economic history and the history of economic thought - which likewise may get essential inspirations from applying that approach. --Neuroeeconomics,Behavioural Economics,Entscheidungsverhalten,Validierung ökonomischer Modelle

Why evolutionary realism underpins evolutionary economic analysis and theory: A reply to Runde's critique

This paper offers a reply to Jochen Runde's critical appraisal of the ontological framework underpinning Dopfer and Potts's (2008) General Theory of Economic Evolution. We argue that Runde's comprehensive critique contains several of what we perceive to be misunderstandings in relation to the key concepts of ‘generic' and ‘meso' that we seek here to unpack and redres

2011,02: Evolution and complexity in economics revisited

The paper discusses recent trends in the sister sciences of evolutionary economics and complexity economics. It suggests that a unifying approach that marries the two strands is needed when reconstructing economics as a science capable of tackling the two key questions of the discipline: complex economic structure and evolutionary economic change. Physics, biology and the cultural sciences are investigated in terms of their usefulness as both paradigmatic orientation and as toolbox. The micro-meso-macro architecture delineated puts meso centre stage, highlighting its significance as structure component and as process component alike, thereby allowing us to handle the key issues of structure and change

Micro-meso-macro

Abstract.: Building on the ontology of evolutionary realism recently proposed by Dopfer and Potts (forthcoming), we develop an analytical framework for evolutionary economics with a micro-meso-macro architecture. The motive for reconception is to make clear the highly complex and emergent nature of existence and change in economic evolution. For us, the central insight is that an economic system is a population of rules, a structure of rules, and a process of rules. The economic system is a rule-system contained in what we call the meso. From the evolutionary perspective, one cannot directly sum micro into macro. Instead, we conceive of an economic system as a set of meso units, where each meso consists of a rule and its population of actualizations. The proper analytical structure of evolutionary economics is in terms of micro-meso-macro. Micro refers to the individual carriers of rules and the systems they organize, and macro consists of the population structure of systems of meso. Micro structure is between the elements of the meso, and macro structure is between meso elements. The upshot is an ontologically coherent framework for analysis of economic evolution as change in the meso domain - in the form of what we call a meso trajectory - and a way of understanding the micro-processes and macro-consequences involved. We believe that the micro-meso-macro analytical framework can greatly enhance the focus, clarity, and, ultimately, power, of evolutionary economic theor

Grundzüge der Evolutionsökonomie - Analytik, Ontologie und theoretische Schlüsselkonzepte

Die Arbeit gibt einen Überblick über die Analytik, Ontologie und die theoretischen Schlüsselkonzepte der Evolutionsökonomie. Zentraler Erkenntnisgegenstand der Evolutionsökonomie ist das Wachstum und die Koordination ökonomisch relevanten Wissens. Im Rahmen des dargestellten einheitlichen Regelansatzes wird Wissen definiert als eine Regel, die ihren Trägern (Subjekte, Objekte) spezifische ökonomische Operationen ermöglicht. Es wird unterschieden zwischen einer generischen Ebene, auf der Regeln geschaffen, adoptiert und für Operationen bewahrt (Prozess) und auf der Regeln koordiniert werden (Struktur) und einer operativen Ebene, auf der die laufenden Operationen und Ressourcenbewegungen bei gegebenen Regeln stattfinden. Die Evolutionsökonomie analysiert Problemstellungen der generischen Ebene und ergänzt somit die Analyse des neoklassischen Mainstreams, der auf die Analyse der operativen Ebene zielt. Die zentrale analytische Einheit, die sowohl Komponente für die Darstellung von Struktur (Strukturkomponente), als auch Komponente für die von Prozessen (Prozesskomponente) ist, konstituiert sich als eine Regel (z. B. Technologie) und ihren physischen Raum-Zeit- Aktualisierungen durch eine Population von Trägern (relative Adoptionshäufigkeit). Die analytische Einheit nimmt im Rahmen der herkömmlichen Unterscheidung zwischen Mikro und Makro eine intermediäre Position ein: sie ist Meso. Die endogene Erklärung von Struktur und Prozess verläuft daher parallel mit einer Rekonstruktion der Ökonomie im Sinne einer Mikro-Meso-Makro Architektur. Die Arbeit diskutiert den Homo Sapiens Oeconomicus (Mikro), die Regeldynamik entlang eines logistischen Drei-Phasen-Trajektors (Meso) und schliesst mit wirtschaftspolitischen Anwendungen des generischen Regelansatzes (Makro).Economic Evolution, Evolutionary Economics, Ontology, Unified Rule Approach, Micro-Meso-Macro, Economic Structure and Process, Technology and Institutions, Economic Policy