B41 - Economic MethodologyNávrat zpět

The author's main objective is to point out the existence of the paradox of involuntary improvement and to present a solution to this paradox. The paradox of involuntary improvement appears when a subject which suffers an injustice involuntarily still gets better off by this change. The suggested solution consists in the decomposition of the total effect of the pseudo-contract into the effect of the basic contract (which is desirable for the subject) and the effect of the super-contract (which is undesirable for the subject). Such a decomposition is not arbitrary, in the author's view, but necessary because it reflects the self-contradictory nature of the pseudo-contract, such as usury and sale/purchase at an unjust price. The author argues that the contract of usury and sale/purchase at an unjust price do not represent cases of Pareto improvement but rather cases of Kaldor-Hicks improvement (Kaldor, 1939; Hicks, 1939). The author's complementary objective is to show that the positive - normative dichotomy is an artificially created distinction which is supposed to cut off economics from its mother discipline, philosophy, and which moral sceptics used to deprive moral philosophy of the status of science.

According to quite a number of scholars, even non-Austrian, some theories of Austrian school of economic thought do provide an increasingly relevant material to explain recent boom-and-bust economic cycles as well as financial crises. However, I argue, this development is not adequately reflected by a corresponding growth of Austrian influence within the economic orthodoxy. Quite to the contrary, many orthodox scholars have taken over rigidly Keynesian positions since the financial crisis culminated in 2008 and 2009. In my article I maintain that Austrians themselves have contributed significantly to such a situation by not preventing three major tactical mistakes, related to the domain of sociology of economics, from occurring. Firstly, they have not formed a really unified and thus influential group of scholars; instead, they have been divided into a few streams, sometimes with highly contradictory stances. Secondly, many Austrians have made bold predictions, especially with regard to possible enormous inflation stemming from the unprecedented provision of liquidity to the financial system during and in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009, which have not been fulfilled at all. Thirdly, a critical number of Austrian school's economists do not effectively communicate with the rest of the profession and even, it seems, fail to adequately comprehend the orthodox analytical tools and theories.

What are the contributions of historical example to understanding of economic phenomena? Economists widely adopt methods of natural sciences. But economics is a social science and the observed economic phenomena are qualitatively different from phenomena observed by natural sciences. Thus the use of natural sciences methods makes implications of economic theoretical models unrealistic. In this paper, I argue that the evidence of historical example is a good method to illuminate the implications of economic theoretical models, because if implications of economic theoretical models are illustrated in historical perspective, they can be more easily verified by common sense thus particular historical circumstances may be partly revealed. Moreover, historical examples also serve to demonstrate the qualitative content of casual economic relations based on human historical experience, which is ignored by natural science methods. The historical example is thus not only more realistic but it better corresponds with the social nature of economic science.

Already during the financial crisis from 2007 through 2009, a growing number of scholars, laymen or media outlets blamed economics as such, at least partially, for the turmoil and subsequent economic malaise. Therefore, the debate concerning future long-term development of economics - or, more precisely, prevailing economic theory - has been intensifying. The following text outlines four possible scenarios - synthetic, evolutionary, reactionary, and revolutionary - of such a development. Each scenario is connected with a methodologist of economics or a methodologist of science, who represent it, for it is right the domain of methodology or/and philosophy of science wherein it is necessary to look for an ideological background belonging to different research traditions in economics as well as for an understanding of determining stances and worldviews of the traditions' proponents.

The article argues that many failures of economic policies, especially in the developing world, are accountable to the methodological biases of the underlying mainstream economic science. While the new institutional and development economics have substantially improved economic models, they still rely on the neoclassical assumptions of methodological individualism and utilitarism. Therefore, they cannot fully grasp the gender and cultural aspects of the societies living in developing countries, the dynamic character of their economies and their embedment in the natural, social and institutional environment. These scientific biases are analysed from the standpoint of four heterodox economic schools: those of feminist economics, evolutionary economics, ecological economics, and economic anthropology. The subsequent failure of the economic policies is documented by the cross-cutting example of the Structural Adjustment Programmes of the Bretton Woods institutions. The article concludes by emphasizing the common points of the heterodox schools and advocating for a methodological plurality in the Czech economic research and education.

An assumption that a central bank can influence the real interest rates is the object of our interest. In the paper we form and solve a model which corresponds to Romer's (2000) assumptions. Our model is IS-LM augmented by a conception of price-adjusting after monetary intervention and inflation expectations. A monetary policy rule is derived from the model. Moreover, it offers a demonstration of economic behaviour by different economic assumptions of different economic schools, similar to one in the book of Heijdra (2002).

In the following text we introduce those approaches to the methodology of economics that are relevant from the perspective of post-Keynesianism. After a partially historical outline of philosophical and methodological stances of John Maynard Keynes and Nicholas Kaldor we attempt to shed some light on a more recent methodological concept, critical realism. This approach is in one way or in other influenced by the two economists' ideas in the realm, as well as some other post-Keynesians. We argue that this, originally heterodox, concept has had an ambition not only to operate as an alternative to the methodology of mainstream, orthodox economics, but to substitute it and thus, proponents say, make economics as such more relevant.

This article presents the approach to the tax reform in the Czech Republic and uses the normative and the teleology theory view. The impulse of this text we can find in lame solution of the public finance reform, in which the elements of the basic methodology thinking are often missing there. This paper uses the texts and the ideas of great lawyers and economists Engliš and Weyr. The first of them derives benefit from the teleology theory, which is based on the relation between the effect and the instrument. The second one plays on normative approach to the noesis. This is based on research of the causality world and the normative world, so we can discuss about the world dualism. The tax law can use both of these opinions approaches.

Currently, if speaking about the theoretical background of the environmental policy, most of environmental economists have neoclassical economics in their minds. State regulation of private activities by means of restrictions, commands, taxes and fees is usually seen as the only one way to reach the high quality of the environment. It is believed, that due to market failures market forces are not able to solve the environmental problems. Actually, these are the main arguments for state interventions into the private negotiations about environmental issues. But are these assumptions correct from the methodological point of view? Is the state regulation really the only one way to solve the environmental problems? In this paper we try to signify the main methodological problems of neoclassical economics and to identify, how to solve environmental problems from the point of view of other economic school of thoughts. The development of theoretical aspects of environmental issues was not fetched up in 60's. and 70's with neoclassical conclusions, but it continued in 80's and 90's with free-market-environmentalism. This theoretical background contains the methodology of Austrian school of thoughts, Public Choice theory and new institutional economics. In the present environmental policy, theoretical conclusions of these school of thoughts are (intentionally) marginalized. At the end of this paper we discuss the interdependence between environmental degradation and economic growth. Is the economic growth bad or good for environmental protection? To answer this question we follow the modeling approach.

The article deals with socio-economic aspects of responsible behaviour of owners, entrepreneurs and managers in practice of economic transformation. As the starting point of defining the concept of responsibility serves the elaboration of basic theoretical economic, juristic, philosophical and ethical approaches. The validity of the hypothesis that private owner is invariably the responsible owner is examined. The article argues, that social responsibility isn't the bare result of private property and that it heavily depends on appropriate institutions. The study proceeds to the institution of liability as realized in basic forms of business organizations. The liability is studied and viewed upon as a constitutive element of the market order. The responsibility is examined in the framework of rights and liabilities of entrepreneurs, partners, shareholders, managers and directors of corporations and business organizations.

The article describes the nature and importance of the concept of private property. It traces back the logical necessity of the respect for property as a safeguard of both peace and prosperity. Then, it surveys arguments in favor of intellectual property that allegedly coincide with those of the tangible property. It shows, however, that after careful research into the origin of patents and copyrights many problems arise. The analysis shows that there are no parallels between private property in tangible goods and property in intangible goods (ownership of ideal objects). Intellectual "property" fails in bringing about both peace and prosperity. The last part of the article suggests how a truly free market - a system that does not recognized intellectual property - might function.

One of the distinctive features of the Austrian school of economics is its emphasis on the methodological foundations of economics and social sciences in general. The two pillars of the approach of this school are methodological individualism and subjectivism. The purpose of this essay is not only to identify a few of the principles with which most Austrians are in agreement but also to emphasise significant diversity within their common viewpoint. An accent is put on praxeology introduced by Mises and Hayek's requirement of "empirical elements" concerning the processes of human learning. It is further emphasised that within this diversity has run and continues to run a common thread of emphasis on man as an intentional, creative being, an actor rather than a mere passive responder to given constraints and circumstances. The essay treats the development of the Austrian methodology mainly under the separate heads of its individual contributors.