An Introduction to Institutional Coordination as An Alternate Model for Neo-Institutional Economic Analysis

Authors

  • Rubén Méndez Reátegui Rubén Méndez R. is a researcher in the Department of Economics at Macquarie University in Sydney in Australia and visiting scholar at Complutense University of Madrid and Salamanca University in Spain

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52195/pm.v10i2.194

Abstract

In this paper, through the formulation of an alternate conceptual model, the author links the concepts of functional entrepreneurship and institutions, understood as a set of categories —formal and informal rules— showing a complex, dynamic and interactive character. Furthermore, the aim of this paper is to introduce an exploration of the concept of institutional coordination or positive institutional interaction as an essential element for neo institutional economics analysis. This aim proposes the hypothesis that institutional coordination or positive interaction among formal and informal institutions is the real key element for a theoretically consistent and com-prehensive analysis, evaluation and testing of institutions. Moreover, the paper is attached to the «meta» concept of society, represented as a process of dynamic collaboration among individuals. This assumption seeks to suggest an improved theoretical standard through the insertion of concepts taken from classical legal theory such as «desuetude» and «contra legem custom». This theoretical standard leads the author to introduce a set of contributions to the contemporary heterodox economics literature: a. Negative institutio-nal interaction is a process where overlapping and displacement between formal and informal rules cannot be leaved outside the model; b. A discussion in terms of institutional marginal rate of technical substitution becomes im-portant for deciding the best possible combination of formal and informal institutions; c. An exploration of the determinants for institutional elasticity, as the author assumes, that determinants of institutional elasticity mainly co-rrespond to the ease with which a «formal institution» can be replaced by an «informal institution» and vice versa; d. The use of the brain reward system and the Neuroscience approach introduced as a tool to improve the analysis of institutional coordination. Together the significance of these contributions brings a secondary hypothesis: traditional neo institutional analysis is weak, in the sense that, it avoids dealing with the real role and relevancy of in-formal institutions shouldering the prevalence of the formal institutional frame-work to reach institutional predictability and a sustainable social order. There-fore, the author claims that the traditional analysis is mistaken as it indirectly supports a separation and confrontation between contributions emerging from the legal abstract theory of the sources of law (Ghersi, 2007) and eco-nomic analysis.

Key words: Functional Entrepreneurship, Formal and Informal Rules, Institutional Coordination, Positive Institutional Interaction, Institutional Elasticity, Sources of Law.

JEL Classification: B52, K00, Z13.

Resumen: En este trabajo, mediante la formulación de un modelo conceptual, el autor vincula los conceptos de empresarialidad funcional e instituciones apuntando a presentar una exploración del concepto de coordinación institu - cional o interacción institucional positiva como elemento esencial para el análisis económico. El objetivo es introducir la hipótesis de que la coordina-ción institucional entre las instituciones formales e informales es el elemento clave a dilucidar con miras a completar la elaboración de una teoría de las instituciones más consistente. Esta dilucidación se expresa a través de las siguientes contribuciones: a) La interacción institucional negativa es un pro-ceso en el que los desplazamientos y sobre posiciones entre reglas formales e informales no pueden ser dejadas fuera del modelo; b) Una discusión de la relevancia y características de la tasa marginal de sustitución técnica en el ámbito de lo institucional —relevante sobre todo al momento de estimar la mejor combinación posible de las instituciones formales e informales—;

c) Una exploración de los determinantes de la elasticidad institucional —que se corresponderían con la facilidad con la que una «institución formal» puede ser sustituida por una «institución informal» y viceversa—; d) El uso del enfoque de Neurociencias y del sistema de recompensa del cerebro, los cuales son presentados como una herramienta para mejorar el análisis de la coordi-nación institucional.

Palabras clave: Empresarialidad Funcional, Reglas Formales e Informales, Coordinación Institucional, Interacción Institucional Positiva, Elasticidad Insti - tucional, Fuentes del Derecho.

Clasificación JEL: B52, K00, Z13.

References

ALONSO, J.A. (2012): «Crítica de Libro: Why Nations Fail. The ori-gins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty» (by Acemoglu, D. and Robinson, J.A.), Principios. Estudios de Economía Política, n.º 21, Madrid: Fundación Sistema.

ALONSO, J.A. and GARCIMARTIN, C. (2008): Collective Action and De-velopment. The Role of Institutions, Madrid: Editorial Com-plutense.

ARGOÑA, A. (1991): «Values, Institutions and ethics», Working Paper, n.o 215, IESE Business School - University of Navarra Press.

ACEMOGLU, D. and JOHNSON, S. (2005): «Unbundling Institu-tions», Journal of Political Economy, vol. 113, n.º 5, pp. 949-995.

ALI, A. (2003): «Institutional Differences as Sources of Growth Differences», Atlantic Economic Journal, vol. 31, n.º 4, pp. 348-362.

AOKI, M. (2001): Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis, Cambridge - Mass: MIT Press.

—(2007): «Endogenizing Institutions and Institutional Chan-ges», Journal of Institutional Economics, vol. 3, Issue 01, pp. 1-31.

AXALA, G. & FABRO, J. (2008): «¿El Impacto de la calidad institu-cional sobre el crecimiento económico depende del nivel inicial de renta?», Economic Affairs, 28(3), 45-49.

BARRY, N. (1997): «The tradition of Spontaneous Order», Laissez-Faire, n.º 6, pp. 1-43, UFM Press.

BASSANINI, A., SCARPETTA, S. and HEMMINGS, P. (2001): Economic growth: the role of policies and institutions. OECD Press.

BAUMOL, W. (1968): «Entrepreneurship in economic theory». American Economic Review; 58(2), 64-7.

BAUMOL, W.J. (1990): «Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproduc-tive, and Destructive», The Journal of Political Economy, vol. 98, n.º 5, pp. 893-921.

BECKER, G. (1983): «Una teoría de la Competencia entre grupos de presión por influencia política. Cuadernos Trimestrales de Economía», 98, 371-373.

BENEGAS-LYNCH, A. (2005): «El Conocimiento y la Ciencia: Algu-nas Consideraciones Hayekianas». Revista de Economía y Derecho, 2(5), 13-26.

BLUNDELL, J. and ROBINSON, C. (2000): «La Regulación sin el Es - tado». Revista Libertas, 32, 4-22.

BOETTKE, P.J. and COYNE, C.J. (2003): «Entrepreneurshio and De-velopment: Cause or consequence?», in Roger Koppl, Jack Birner, and Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard (ed.) Austrian Economics and Entrepreneurial Studies (Advances in Austrian Economics, Volume 6), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 67-87.

CALABRESI, G. and MELAMED, A.D. (1972): «Property Rules, Liability Rules and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral», Har-vard Law Review, vol. 85, p. 108.

CHANG, H. (2011): «Institutions and economic development: theo-ry, policy and history», Journal of Institutional Economics, vol. 7, n.º 4, pp. 473-498, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

CAVADIAS, E. (2001): «El nuevo Institucionalismo en America La-tina». Ciencias de Gobierno, 10, 11-25.

COASE, R.H. (1937): «The Nature of the Firm». Economica, 4 (16), 386-405.

—(1960): «The Problem of Social Cost». Journal of Law and Eco-nomics, 1(3), 1-44.

—(1994): La Empresa, el Mercado y la Ley. Madrid: Alianza Eco-nomía.

COBIN, J.M. (2009): Políticas Públicas: Tópicos Modernos de la Eco-nomía de Mercado para el Bienestar Social, Santiago de Chile: Fondo Editorial Universidad Andrés Bello.

FOSS, N.J. and KLEIN, P.G. (2010): «Alertness, Action, and the Ante-cedents of Entrepreneurship», The Journal of Private Enter-prise, vol. 2, pp. 145-164.

FURUBOTB, E.G. and RICHTER, R. (1998): Institutions and Economic Theory. The Contribution of the New Institutional Economics. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

GAGLIARDI, F. (2008): «Institutions and Economic Change: A Cri-tical Survey of the New Institutional Approaches and Em-pirical Evidence», Journal of Socio-Economics, vol. 37, n.º 1, pp. 416-443.

GARCIA-GUADILLA, M.P. and ROA CARRERO, E. (1997): «Civil Society, Classic Liberal Democracy and Market Economics: The Liberal Organizations in Venezuela», Estudios Científicos, Salamanca: Ediciones USAL.

GHERSI, S.E. (1988): «El Costo de la Legalidad». Centro de Estudios Públicos, 30, 83-110.

—(1991). «Economía de la Corrupción». Centro de Estudios Públicos, 73, 3-20

—(2005). «La Economía Informal en America Latina». Cato Journal, vol. 7(1), 1-14.

—(2007): «The competitive character of the Sources of Law», Revista de Instituciones, Ideas y Mercados, n.º 47, pp. 89-109.

—(2009): «Las consecuencias jurídicas del mercantilismo», EL CATO, Washington: Cato Institute.

GERBER, E.R. (1999): The Populist Paradox: Interest Group Influence and the Promise of Direct Legislation. Princeton: Princeton Uni-versity Press.

GREIF, A. (1998): «Historical and Comparative Institutional Analy-sis», The American Economic Review, 88(2), 80-84.

HART, H.L.A. (1980): El Concepto de Derecho. México: Editorial Na - cional.

HAYEK, F.A. (1978): Law, Legislation and Liberty, University of Chi-cago Press.

HELLMAN, J. & KAUFMANN, D. (2001): «La captura del Estado en las economías en transición». Finanzas y Desarrollo, 38(3), 31-35.

HEYNE, P.T, PRYCHITKO, D.L. and BOETTKE, P.J. (2009): The Economic Way of Thinking. Prentice Hall.

HODGSON, G.M. (2006): What are institutions?, Journal of Economic Issues, vol. 40, n.º 1.

—(1993): Economía y evolución: Revitalizando la Economía. Ma-drid: Colegio de Economistas de Madrid, Celeste Ediciones.

—(1998): «The Approach of Institutional Economics». Journal of Economic Literature, 36, 166-192.

—(2001): «How Economics Forgot History: The Problem of Historical Specificity in Social Science». Londres: Routledge.

HUERTA DE SOTO, J. (2009): The Theory of Dynamic Efficiency, Routledge.

—(2010): Socialism, Economic Calculation and Entrepreneurship, Edward Elgar.

KASPER, W. (2003): Building Prosperity: Australia’s future as a global player. Sydney: The Centre for Independet Studies.

KELSEN, H. (2001): Introducción a la Teoría Pura del Derecho. Lima: Asociación Peruana de Derecho Constitucional.

KIRZNER, I.M. (1976): «Equilibrium versus Market Process», The Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics, Kansas City: Sheed and Ward Inc.

—(1978a). Competition and Entrepreneurship, University of Chicago Press.

—(1978b). Economics and Error, Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel.

KLEIN, P.G., MAHONEY, J.T., MCGAHAN, A. and PITELIS, C. (2010): «To-ward a theory of public entrepreneurship», European Mana-gement Review, n.º 07, pp. 1-15. Milano: European Academy of Management.

MENDEZ, R.C.B. (2011): «Institutional Innovation, Deregulation and Competition in a Structured Society». HDR Expo 2011, Sydney: Macquarie University Faculty of Business and Eco-nomics Press.

MENGER, C. (1976 [1871]): Principles of Economics. Institute for Hu-mane Studies.

NORTH, D. (1981): Growth and Structural Change, New York: W.W. Norton.

—(1990): Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Per - formance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

—(1991): «Institutions», Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 5, n.º 1, pp. 97-112.

—(1994): «Economic Performance Through Time», American Economic Review, vol. 84, n.º 3, pp. 359-368.

—(2005): Understanding the Process of Economic Change, New York: Princeton University Press.

OSTROM, E. (1990): Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institu-tions for Collective Action, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

PEREZ, E. (2001): Transitions (Theories of): changes in the Eastern countries, Madrid: Editora Critica de Ciencias Sociales.

ROUX, D. (2006): The Prizes Nobel of Economics, Madrid: AKAL Eco-nomia Actual.

SAN EMETERIO, N. (2006): New Institutional Economics, Madrid: Sin-tesis Press.

SCHOTTER, A., (1981): The Economic Theory of Social Institutions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

SOBEL, R.S. (2008): «Testing Baumol: Institutional quality and the productivity of entrepreneurship», Journal of Business Ven-turing 23, pp. 641-655, Philadelphia: Elsevier Press.

STIGLER, G. (1982): The Economist as Preacher, and Other Essays, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

—(1992): «Law or Economics?», Journal of Law and Economics, 35, pp. 455-68.

WEBER, M. (1930). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, London: Allen & Unwin.

—(1964): Economy and Society, vol. I, p. 632, Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica

WILLIAMSON, O. (1985): The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting, New York: Free Press.

Downloads

Published

2013-07-01

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

An Introduction to Institutional Coordination as An Alternate Model for Neo-Institutional Economic Analysis. (2013). REVISTA PROCESOS DE MERCADO, 10(2), 151-197. https://doi.org/10.52195/pm.v10i2.194