|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Economic development as a change of qualitatively different systems of social and economic relations: To a critique of “pan-institutionalism” and “ideational” approach
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-10-99-114
Abstract
The paper shows that now the mainstream of the economic theory is in crisis losing the heuristic potential. There is some positive potential of the institutional approach that is close to (without admitting it) a number of methodological approaches in Marxist political economy (allocation of objective determinants of economic behavior, an implied confession of existence of similar economic systems, emphasis on property relations, etc.) and goes farther than neoclassics. The “ failures” of institutionalism are specified, and it is emphasized that in a number of points (especially, in exaggerating the role of institutions — political, in particular — as bases of economic changes) the criticism of R. I. Kapelyushnikov’s “pan-institutionalism” is justified but positive proposals of the author, the “ideational” approach, are themselves subject to criticism. The conclusion is drawn that active discussions concerning the methodology and paradigmatic foundations bases of economic theory are on the agenda.
Keywords
contemporary economic theory,
institutionalism,
political economy,
Marxism,
economic methodology,
economic development
JEL: B40; B 51; N00; O30; O43; P14
About the Authors
Alexandеr V. Buzgalin
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Moscow
Russian Federation
Moscow
Andrey I. Kolganov
Lomonosov Moscow State University; Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Moscow
Russian Federation
Moscow
References
1. Gloveli G. D. (2017). N. P. Oganovsky: The pattern of agrarian evolution and the problems of formational approach. Voprosy Politicheskoi Ekonomii, No. 2, pp. 38—52 (In Russian).
2. Kapeliushnikov R. I. (2019a). Contra pan-institutionalism. Part I. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 7, pp. 119—146. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-7-119-146
3. Kapeliushnikov R. I. Contra pan-institutionalism. Part II. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 8, pp. 98—126 (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-8-98-126
4. Marx K. (1955a). Critique of Hegel’s philosophy of right. In: Marx K., Engels F. Works. 2 nd ed., Vol. 1. Moscow: Gospolitizdat. (In Russian).
5. Marx K. (1955b). The theses on Feuerbach. In: Marx K., Engels F. Works. 2 nd ed., Vol. 3. Moscow: Gospolitizdat. (In Russian).
6. Marx K. (1957). The 18 th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. In: Marx K., Engels F. Works. 2 nd ed., Vol. 8. Moscow: Gospolitizdat. (In Russian).
7. Marx K. (1959). A critique of political economy. In: Marx K., Engels F. Works. 2 nd ed, Vol. 13. Moscow: Gospolitizdat. (In Russian).
8. Stroganov A.I. (2003). Results of modernization in Chile in the 60—90-s of the 20 th century. Latinoamerikanskij Istoricheskij Almanakh, № 4. Moscow: Institute of World History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russian).
9. Hayek F. A. (2018). The constitution of freedom. Moscow: Novoe Izdatelstvo. (In Russian).
10. Engels F. (1961). Anti-Dühring. In: Marx K., Engels F. Works. 2 nd ed., Vol. 20. Moscow: Gospolitizdat. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Buzgalin A.V., Kolganov A.I. Economic development as a change of qualitatively different systems of social and economic relations: To a critique of “pan-institutionalism” and “ideational” approach. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2019;(10):99-114. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-10-99-114
Views:
1591
Email this article 
