|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Post-institutionalism versus economic science: Critical analysis
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-3-143-159
Abstract
The article analyzes postinstitutionalism, highlighting its inability to present a “new mainstream” in institutional studies in economics. Pointing out some real problems of institutional studies of modern society, postinstitutionalism does not provide what economic theory needs. The rejection of functionalism, rationalism and efficiency and optimality criteria sidetracks this approach to the field of sociology and cultural studies; deeconomization is also effected on account of target substitution of institution transplanting. Another essential problem is the confusion of notions through their “unsealing” that enables an “alternate” interpretation of blockchain and allows to oppose against the transaction costs minimization principle, basing on the criticisms of the Coase Theorem. Rejecting this interpretation, the article claims that the studies of the institutional complexity of modern society does not require refusal of classical approaches, but their clarification. The paper also criticizes the call for “postdisciplinarity” and raises the question of the quality of interdisciplinary institution researches.
About the Author
D. V. Trubitsyn
Transbaikalian State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dmitry V. Trubitsyn
Chita
References
1. DeLanda M. (2018). A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. Perm: Gile Press. (In Russian).
2. Collins R. (20 02). The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Novosibirsk: Sibirskiy Khronograf. (In Russian).
3. Rozov N. S. (2011) Track and рass: Macrosociological foundations of Russia’s strategies in the 21st сentury. Moscow: ROSSPEN. (In Russian).
4. Tambovtsev V. L. (2021). Is unified institutional economics possible? Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 1, pp. 33—51. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/00428736202113351
5. Trubitsyn D. V. (2023). Postinstitutionalism. The criticism of philosophical and methodological foundations of “alternative” studies of institutions. Journal of Institutional Studies, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 147—157. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17835/20766297.2023.15.3.147157
6. Frolov D. P. (2019). Postinstitutional theory of blockchain. Zhurnal Economicheskoj Teorii, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 262—278. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31063/20736517/2019.162.8
7. Frolov D. P. (2020). Post institutionalism: Beyond the institutional mainstream. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 5, pp. 107—140. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042873620205107140
8. Frolov D. P. (2021). Transplantation of economic institutions: An extended (post institutional) theory. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 9, pp. 69—108. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/004287362021969108
9. Frolov D. P. (2022). The future of plura listic institutional theory. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 4, pp. 45—69. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/00428736202244569
10. Harrison L. (2016). Jews, Confucians, and Protestants: Cultural capital and the end of multiculturalism. Moscow: Mysl. (In Russian).
11. Acemoglu D., Robinson J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. New York: Crown Publishers.
12. Cleaver F. (2001). Institutional bricolage, conflict and cooperation in Usangu, Tanzania. IDS Bulletin, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 26—35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17595436.2001.mp32004004.x
13. de Jong M. (2013). China’s art of institutional bricolage: Selectiveness and gradualism in the policy transfer style of a nation. Policy and Society, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 89—101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2013.05.007
14. Koppenjan J., de Jong M. (2018). The introduction of publicprivate partnerships in the Netherlands as a case of institutional bricolage: The evolution of an AngloSaxon transplant in a Rhineland context. Public Administration, Vol. 96, No. 1, pp. 171—184. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12360
15. McKague K., Oliver C. (2016). Network bricolage as the reconciliation of indigenous and transplanted institutions in Africa. Africa Journal of Management, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 300—329. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322373.2016.1210952
16. North D. C., Wallis J. J. (1994). Integrating institutional change and technical change in economic history: A transaction cost approach. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, Vol. 150, No. 4, pp. 609—624.
17. Ostrom E. (1992). Crafting institutions for self-governing irrigation systems. California: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
18. Wallis J. J., North D. C. (1988). Should transaction costs be subtracted from gross national product? Journal of Economic History, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 651—654. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700005878
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Trubitsyn D.V. Post-institutionalism versus economic science: Critical analysis. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2024;(3):143-159. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-3-143-159
Views:
511
Email this article 
