The name is absent



economics argues that differences in economic behaviour, both of firms and of regions, are primarily
related to differences in institutions. These institutional differences can be present among firms (such as
routines and business cultures) and among regions or countries (legal frameworks, informal rules, policies,
values and norms). In essence, comparative analysis between the units comprising institutions (between
firms or regions) in terms of their institutions can then be related to differences in economic outcomes,
like profit, growth, income distribution or conflicts.

It should be noted that this definition of institutional economics, although present in some key
contributions (Hodgson 1988), is only partial. One can distinguish between under and oversocialised
accounts related to putting primacy to institutions and social class regulating individual behaviour or
individuals whose rational actions result in institutions (Granovetter 1985). The ‘old’ institutional
economics (Hodgson 1988, 1998) corresponds largely to the oversocialised account, while the ‘new’
institutional economics (Williamson 1985) is in line with the undersocialised account (and, in this respect,
is closer to neoclassical economics). Our characterisation of institutional economics above deals primarily
with the over-socialised account. In economics, however, a relatively small group of scholars adhere to the
over-socialised notion of the economy as consisting of agents. By contrast, a large part of economic
geography research can fairly be characterised as being closer to the oversocialised account, putting
primacy at institutions rather than individual action (Gertler 1997; Amin and Thrift 1994).

Still, it must be recognised that the division between the two accounts is no longer as sharp as before.
In many cases, institutional analyses do no longer explain economic behaviour from institutions alone. In
fact, we will argue below that the interesting developments in economics and geography take place
exactly on the interfaces between different approaches, for example, on the institutional/evolutionary
interface. Still, we find it useful to characterise institutional economics as an oversocialised account as a
heuristic device. Our definition stresses the central idea (or bias, if you like) that institutions determine the
larger part of economic behaviour, and, consequently, differences in economic behaviour and performance
can be related more or less directly to differences in institutions. We thus aim to define institutional
economics as an archetype way of reasoning, rather than a coherent school of thought (which it is not).

Finally, it should also be noted that institutional economists actually have two quite different
explananda. Apart from explaining differences in economic behaviour and performance, the change in
institutions as such is also a topic regularly addressed (Hodgson 1988). As such, institutional economics is
close to sociology, and is sometimes labelled as or linked to the field of economic sociology (Granovetter
and Swedberg 1992).

2.3 Evolutionary economics

As with the two theoretical frameworks mentioned previously, it is far from easy to determine what is
the essence of evolutionary economics. As Hodgson (1999) has put it, “there is no established consensus
on what ‘evolutionary economics’ should mean. ... a curious aspect of ‘evolutionary economics’ is that
many people use the term as if it required little further explanation and assume that everyone knows what
it means” (p. 129). It is Hodgson (1993, 1999) himself who has done a serious effort to define what
evolutionary economics is all about next to other contribution including Nelson (1995) and Saviotti
(1996). According to Hodgson, the object of study is novelty, or, as Saviotti puts it, qualitative change as
opposed to quantitative change central to neoclassical growth theory.

A comfortable starting point is to claim that, contrary to neoclassical economics, decision-making



More intriguing information

1. IMPLICATIONS OF CHANGING AID PROGRAMS TO U.S. AGRICULTURE
2. Gianluigi Zenti, President, Academia Barilla SpA - The Changing Consumer: Demanding but Predictable
3. National urban policy responses in the European Union: Towards a European urban policy?
4. The name is absent
5. Structural Conservation Practices in U.S. Corn Production: Evidence on Environmental Stewardship by Program Participants and Non-Participants
6. Testing Panel Data Regression Models with Spatial Error Correlation
7. Demographic Features, Beliefs And Socio-Psychological Impact Of Acne Vulgaris Among Its Sufferers In Two Towns In Nigeria
8. Educational Inequalities Among School Leavers in Ireland 1979-1994
9. The name is absent
10. Name Strategy: Its Existence and Implications
11. Pricing American-style Derivatives under the Heston Model Dynamics: A Fast Fourier Transformation in the Geske–Johnson Scheme
12. WP RR 17 - Industrial relations in the transport sector in the Netherlands
13. Comparative study of hatching rates of African catfish (Clarias gariepinus Burchell 1822) eggs on different substrates
14. Developments and Development Directions of Electronic Trade Platforms in US and European Agri-Food Markets: Impact on Sector Organization
15. The name is absent
16. Public-private sector pay differentials in a devolved Scotland
17. The name is absent
18. Unemployment in an Interdependent World
19. Who’s afraid of critical race theory in education? a reply to Mike Cole’s ‘The color-line and the class struggle’
20. The name is absent