European Journal of Law and Economics

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 3–7 | Cite as

Dan Št’astný: The Economics of Economics

  • Pavel KuchařEmail author
Book Review


The Economics of Economics (2010) by Dan Št’astný extends the economic approach of public choice and law and economics to see how economists behave so as to improve their well being in the world of uncertainty, scarcity and institutions. According to Št’astný, economists have been adjusting their behavior to the changing institutional environment and, consequently, ended up policy irrelevant. The book review provides an assessment of the model Št’astný employs. On the one hand, Št’astný offers a looking glass that helps seeing the decision making process of an economist from a price theory perspective. I suggest, on the other hand, that the model would be more accurate had it not considered preferences constant. In fact, the evolution of economists’ preferences and the changing sense of praiseworthiness is what the model should try to explain.


Economics of Economics Public choice Law and economics Consensus Theory-policy gap Praiseworthiness 

JEL Classification

A11 Z00 


  1. Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1967). The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  2. Colander, D. (2007). The making of an economist, redux. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Coupé, T. (2003). Revealed performances: Worldwide rankings of economists and economics departments, 1990–2000. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(6), 1309–1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coupé, T. (2004). What do we know about ourselves? On the economics of economics. Kyklos, 57(2), 197–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Doucouliagos, H., & Paldam, M. (2009). The aid effectiveness literature: The sad results of 40 years of research. Journal of Economic Surveys, 23(3), 433–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frey, B. S. (2000). Does economics have an effect? Towards an economics of economics. Zurich: Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich.Google Scholar
  7. Frey, B. S. (2006). How influential is Economics? De Economist, 154(2), 295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Frey, B. S., & Eichenberger, R. (1992). Economics and economists: A European perspective. The American Economic Review, 82(2), 216–220.Google Scholar
  9. Klamer, A., & Colander, D. (1990). The making of an economist. Westview Pr (Short Disc).Google Scholar
  10. Klein, D. B., & Romero, P. P. (2007). Model building versus theorizing: The paucity of theory in the Journal of Economic Theory. Econ Journal Watch, 4(2), 241–271.Google Scholar
  11. Levy, D. M., & Roháč, D. (2009). Praiseworthiness and endogenous growth. Prague Economic Papers, 2009(3), 220–234.Google Scholar
  12. Posner, R. A. (1973). Economic analysis of law. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  13. Smith, A. (1759). The theory of moral sentiments (1st Edition in this form. Series: The Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith; 1. ed.). USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Stanley, T. D., Doucouliagos, C., & Jarrell, S. B. (2008). Meta-regression analysis as the socio-economics of economics research. Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(1), 276–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Št’astný, D. (2010). The Economics of Economics. CEVRO Institute Academic Press.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Institutional EconomicsPrague University of Economics and Real Collegio Carlo AlbertoMoncalieriItaly

Personalised recommendations