|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Scientific Communities and Spatial Concentration in Economic Science
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2009-2-105-118
Abstract
The idea that comparative success of certain territorial centers of economic research is linked to the quality of institutions is currently widely recognized in the literature. The problem is however to identify the relevant level of institutions. The paper claims that the key role is played not by formal and informal norms of the "society in general", but by specific institutions of scientific community, often significantly different from general norms in terms of incentives structure. The author also analyzes the labor market for economists as a factor of competition among scientific communities.
About the Author
A. Libman
Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences; University of Mannheim (UMA)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Барсукова С. Ю. Российские неформальные практики: экспортный вариант // Экономическая социология. 2008. Т. 9, № 3.
2. Гельмгольц Г. Об академической свободе в немецких университетах // Отечественные записки. 2003. № 6.
3. Латов Ю. В. История экономических учений как отражение конкуренции национальных экономических систем в «ядре» мира-экономики // Экономический вестник РГУ. 2007. Т. 5, № 3.
4. Олейник А. Н. Научная коммуникация на стыке парадигм // Общественные науки и современность.2008. № 2.
5. Розов Н.С. «Спор о методе», школа «Анналов» и перспективы социально-экономического познания // Общественные науки и современность. 2008. № 1.
6. Соколов М. «Рынки идей»: что экономические модели могут объяснить в интеллектуальной истории?/Доклад на семинаре ЛИА ГУ-ВШЭ, 2008.
7. Сонин К., Хованская И., Юдкевич М. Построение исследовательского университета: структура финансирования и условия найма профессоров // Вопросы экономики. 2008. № 12. С. 72-83.
8. Фролов Д. Методологический институционализм: новый взгляд на эволюцию экономической науки // Вопросы экономики. 2008. № 11.
9. Adcock R., Collier D. Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research // American Political Science Review. 2001. Vol. 95, No 3.
10. Albert M. Ökonomie der Methodologie: Eine institutionalistische Analyse // Universitätsreden der Universität des Saarlandes. 2007. Bd. 70.
11. Albert M. Product Quality in a Simple OLG Model of Scientific Competition // MAGKS Working Paper No. 4. 2008.
12. Brady H. E., Collier D., Seawright J. Towards a Pluralistic Vision of Methodology // Political Analysis. 2006. Vol. 14, No 3.
13. Bronfenbrenner M. The State of Japanese Economics // American Economic Review. 1956. Vol. 46, No 2.
14. Butos W. N., Boettke P. J. Kirznerian Entrepreneurship and the Economics of Science // Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines. 2002. Vol. 12, No 1.
15. Caplan B. What If the Median Voter Were a Failing Student? // Economists' Voice. 2008. Sept.
16. Carillo M. R., Papagni E., Capitanio F. Effects of Social Interaction on Scientists' Productivity // MPRA Paper No 7880. November 2007.
17. Colander D. The Ageing of an Economist // Journal of the History of Economic Thought. 2003. Vol. 25, No 2.
18. Coupe T., Smeets V., Warzynski F. Incentives, Sorting, and Productivity along the Career: Evidence from a Sample of Top Economists // Journal of Law, Economics and Organization. 2005. Vol. 22, No 1.
19. Dalen H. P. van. Pluralism in Economics: A Public Good or a Public Bad? // Teaching Pluralism in Economics/J. Groenewegen (ed.). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2007.
20. Dalen H. P. van, Klamer A. Is Science a Case of Wasteful Competition? // Kyklos. 2005. Vol. 58, No 3.
21. David P. A. The Historical Origins of Open Science: An Essay on Patronage, Reputation and Common Agency Contracting in the Scientific Revolution. Mimeo, 2007.
22. Eells W.C., Cleveland A.C. Faculty Inbreeding // Journal of Higher Education. 1935. Vol. 6, No 5.
23. Frey B. S., Humbert S., Schneider F. Was denken deutsche ökonomen? Eine empirische Auswertung einer Internetbefragung unter den Mitgliedern des Vereins fьr Sozialpolitik im Sommer 2006 // Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik. 2007. Bd. 8, No 4.
24. Frey B. S., Eichenberger R. American and European Economics and Economists // Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1993. Vol. 7, No 3.
25. Gazal-Ayal O. Economic Analysis of Law and Economics // Capital University Law Review. 2007. Vol. 35, No. 3
26. Heckman J. Schools, Skills and Synapses // IZA Discussion Paper No 3515. 2008.
27. Hesse J.-O. Why Did German Economics Turn to a Mathematical Approach So Late? On the Relationship of Social Change and Scientific Progress. Mimeo, 2005.
28. L. Externalities in the Economics of Science // CEPET Discussion Paper. 2003. No 3.
29. Luetge C. Economics in Philosophy of Science: A Dismal Contribution? // Synthese. 2004. Vol. 140, No. 3
30. Mahoney J. Nominal, Ordinal and Narrative Appraisal in Macrocausal Analysis // American Journal of Sociology. 1999. Vol. 104, No 4.
31. Seawright J. Qualitative Comparative Analysis vis-à-vis Regression. Mimeo, 2004.
32. Vanberg V. J. The 'Science-as-Market' Analogy: A Constitutional Economics Perspective // Constitutional Political Economy. 2009 [forthcoming].
Review
For citations:
Libman A. Scientific Communities and Spatial Concentration in Economic Science. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2009;(2):105-118. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2009-2-105-118
Views:
584
Email this article 
