Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T08:21:43.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ideas or institutions? – a comment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2015

GUIDO TABELLINI
GUIDO TABELLINI*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics and IGIER, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy
*
*Email: guido.tabellini@unibocconi.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Deirdre McCloskey is right, economists interested in comparative development ought to pay more attention to the history of ideas. But, which ideas? And how do they emerge? In this short paper I argue that other ideas, besides the bourgeois ethics, are at least as important. And that a new emphasis on ideas does not make institutions less important, nor does it require that we abandon the traditional method of economics.

Type
Comment
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 43 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Millennium Economics Ltd 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acemoglu, D. and Robinson, J. A. (2012), Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, New York: Crown Business.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D., Naidu, S., Restrepo, P. and Robinson, J. A. (2014), ‘Democracy Does Cause Growth,’ NBER Working Paper No. 20004.Google Scholar
Battigalli, P. and Dufwenberg, M. (2009), ‘Dynamic Psychological Games’, Journal of Economic Theory, 144 (1): 1–35.Google Scholar
Benabou, R. and Tirole, J. (2006), ‘Belief in a Just World and Redistributive Politics’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121 (2): 699–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benabou, R., Ticchi, D. and Vindigni, A. (2014), ‘Forbidden Fruits: The Political Economy of Science, Religion, and Growth’, Princeton mimeoGoogle Scholar
Benabou, R., Ticchi, D. and Vindigni, A. (2015), ‘Religion and Innovation’, American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 105 (5): 346–351.Google Scholar
Besley, T. and Persson, T. (2011), Pillars of Prosperity: The Political Economics of Development Clusters, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bisin, A. and Verdier, T. (2001), ‘The Economics of Cultural Transmission and the Dynamics of Preferences’, Journal of Economic Theory, 97 (2): 298–319.Google Scholar
Glaeser, E. L., La Porta, R., Lopez de Silanes, F. and Shleifer, A. (2004), ‘Do Institutions Cause Growth’, Journal of Economic Growth, 9 (3): 271–304.Google Scholar
Greif, A. and Tabellini, G. (2015), ‘The Clan and the Corporation: Sustaining Cooperation in China and Europe’, IGIER Working Paper, February.Google Scholar
Hart, O. and Moore, J. (2008), ‘Contracts as Reference Points’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123 (1): 1–48.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. (2007), ‘Meanings of Methodological Individualism’, Journal of Economic Methodology, 14 (2): 211–226.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. N. (2015), ‘Max U versus Humanomics: A Critique of Neo-Institutionalism’, Journal of Institutional Economics, published online. DOI: 10.1017/S1744137415000053.Google Scholar
Mokyr, J. (2012), ‘The Enlightened Economy - An Economic History of Britain 1700-1850’, New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Persson, T. and Tabellini, G. (2006), ‘Democracy and Development: The Devil in the Details’, American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 96 (2): 319–324.Google Scholar
Platteau, J. P. (2000), Institutions, Social Norms, and Economic Development, Harwood Academic Publishers, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1945), The Open Society and Its Enemies, 2 vols. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Tabellini, G. (2008a), ‘Institutions and Culture, Presidential Lecture’, Journal of the European Economic Association Papers and Proceedings, 6 (2–3): 255–294.Google Scholar
Tabellini, G. (2008b), ‘The Scope of Cooperation: Values and Incentives’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123 (3): 905–950.Google Scholar