The market as foreground: The ontological status of the market in market process theory

Abstract

Markets as objects of study in their own right have been given surprisingly little attention within neoclassical economics. The market has, in contrast, remained in the foreground for heterodox schools of economics, including market process theory. This essay suggests that the market remained in the analytical foreground for market process theorists even as it was increasingly absent in neoclassical economics on account of the different ontological commitments characterizing the two traditions. Attending to the ontological dimension of economic thought offers us a more complete understanding of how economics could become disconnected from the markets of the real world as well as why it was retained by heterodox economists.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Arrow, K. J., & Debreu, G. (1954). Existence of an equilibrium for a competitive economy. Econometrica, 22(3), 265–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Blaug, M. (1980). The methodology of economics: Or how economists explain. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blaug, M. (1996). Economic theory in retrospect (5th edition). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boettke, P. J. (1997). Where did economics go wrong? Modern economics as a flight from reality. Critical Review, 11(1), 11–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Boettke, P. J., & Beaulier, S. A. (2004). The really real in economics. In P. Lewis (Ed.), Transforming economics: Perspectives on the critical realist project (pp. 187–201). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boettke, P. J., & Storr, V. H. (2002). Post-classical political economy: Polity, society, and economy in weber, Mises, and Hayek. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 61(1), 161–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Buchanan, J. M. (1964). What should economists do? Southern Economic Journal, 30(3), 213–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Caldwell, B. (1982). Beyond positivism: Economic methodology in the twentieth century. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Coase, R. (1988). The firm, the market, and the law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fleetwood, S. (1995). Hayek’s political economy: The socio-economics of order. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Friedman, M. 1966[1953]. Essays in Positive Economics, Chicago, University of Chicago Press

  12. Hayek, F. A. (1948). Individualism and economic order. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hayek, F.A. 1971. Principles or expediency? In Toward Liberty: Essays in Honor of Ludwig von Mises Volume I, Menlo Park, CA, Institute for Humane Studies

  14. Hayek, F. A. (1979). The counter-revolution of science. Liberty Fund: Indianapolis.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hayek, F. A. 2011[1960] The Constitution of Liberty, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press

  16. Hicks, J. (1965). Capital and growth. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Holcombe, R. G. (2008). Advancing economic analysis beyond the equilibrium framework. Review of Austrian Economics, 21(4), 225–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jackson, W. A. (2019). Markets: Perspectives from economic and social theory. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kirzner, I. M. (1973). Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kirzner, I.M. (1976). On the Method of Austrian Economics, in Dolan, E.G. (ed.) The Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics, Kansas City, MO, Sheed & Ward, 40–51.

  21. Kirzner, I.M. 1982. Uncertainty, discovery, and human action: A study of the entrepreneurial profile in the Misesian system, in Kirzner, I.M. (ed.) Method, Process, and Austrian economics: Essays in honor of Ludwig von Mises, Lexington, MA, Lexington Books, 139–160

  22. Kirzner, I. M. (2000). The driving force of the market:Essays in Austrian economics. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lachmann, L. M. (1971). The legacy of max weber. Berkeley: The Glendessary Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lachmann, L. M. 1977. Capital, expectations, and the market process: Essays on the theory of the market economy, (W. grinder, ed.) Menlo Park, CA, Institute of Humane Studies

  25. Lachmann, L. M. (1986). The market as an economic process. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lachmann, L. M. (1976). Austrian Economics in the Age of the Neo-Ricardian Counterrevolution, in Dolan, E.G. (ed.). The Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics, Kansas City, MO, Sheed & Ward, 215–223.

  27. Lavoie, D. (1990). Understanding differently: Hermeneutics and the spontaneous order of communicative processes. In B. Caldwell (Ed.), Carl Menger and his legacy in economics (pp. 359–378). Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lavoie, D. (2015). The discovery and interpretation of profit opportunities: Culture and the Kirznerian entrepreneur. In L. E. Grube & V. H. Storr (Eds.), Culture and economic action (pp. 48–67). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lavoie, D., & Chamlee-Wright, E. (2000). Culture and Enterprise: The development, representation, and morality of business. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lawson, C. (1996). Realism, theory and individualism in the work of Carl Menger. Review of Social Economy, 54(4), 445–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lawson, T. (1997). Economics and reality. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lewis, P. (2005). Boettke, the Austrian school and the reclamation of reality in modern economics. Review of Austrian Economics, 18(1), 83–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lewis, P. (2008a). Uncertainty, power, and trust. Review of Austrian Economics, 21(2–3), 183–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lewis, P. (2008b). Solving the ‘Lachmann problem’: Orientation, individualism, and the causal explanation of socioeconomic order. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 65(5), 827–857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lewis, P. (2010). Certainly not! A critical realist recasting of Ludwig von Mises’s methodology of the social sciences. Journal of Economic Methodology, 17(3), 277–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lewis, P. (2011). Far from a nihilistic crowd: The theoretical contribution of radical subjectivist Austrian economics. Review of Austrian Economics, 24(2), 185–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lewis, P. (2015). Notions of order and process in Hayek: The significance of emergence. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 39(4), 1167–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lewis, P. (2016). Systems, structural properties, and levels of organization: The influence of Ludwig von Bertalanffy on the work of F.a. Hayek. Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, 34A, 125–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lewis, P. (2017). Shackle on choice, imagination, and creativity: Hayekian foundations. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 41(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Lewis, P., & Runde, J. (2007). Subjectivism, social structure and the possibility of socio-economic order: The case of Ludwig Lachmann. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 62(2), 167–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lie, J. (1997). Sociology of markets. Annual Reviews in Sociology, 23, 341–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Littlechild, S. C. (1982). Equilibrium and the market process. In I. M. Kirzner (Ed.), Method, process, and Austrian economics: Essays in honor of Ludwig von Mises. Lexington: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Maki, U. (1990). Mengerian economics in realist perspective. In B. Caldwell (Ed.), Carl Menger and his legacy in economics (pp. 289–312). Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Maki, U. (1992). The market as an isolated causal process: A metaphysical ground for realism. In B. Caldwell & S. Boehm (Eds.), Austrian economics: Tensions and new directions (pp. 35–66). Boston: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  45. McCloskey, D. N. (1985). The rhetoric of economics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Menger, C. 1985[1883]. Investigations Into the Method of the Social Sciences, Schneider, L. (ed.), nock, F. J. (trans.), New York, New York University press

  47. Mises, L. 1978[1960] Epistemological Problems of Economics, New York, New York University press

  48. Mises, L. 1996[1949] Human Action, Little Rock, AK, fox & Wilkes

  49. Mittermeier, K. 1986. Mechanomorphism, in Kirzner, I.M. (ed.) Subjectivism, Intelligibility, and economic understanding: Essays in honor of Ludwig M. Lachmann on his Eightieth Birthday, New York, New York University Press, 236–251

  50. North, D. (1977). Markets and other allocation Systems in History: The challenge of Karl Polanyi. Journal of European Economic History, 3, 703–716.

    Google Scholar 

  51. O’Driscoll, G. P., & Rizzo, M. J. (1996). The economics of time and ignorance. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Rogers, C. (2018). The conceptual flaw in the microeconomic foundations of dynamic stochastic general equilibrium models. Review of Political Economy, 30(1), 72–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Runde, J. (2001). Bringing social structure Back into economics: On critical realism and Hayek’s scientism essay. Review of Austrian Economics, 14(1), 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Stigler, G. (1957). Perfect competition, historically contemplated. Journal of Political Economy, 65(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Stigler, G. (1967). Imperfections in the capital market. Journal of Political Economy, 75(3), 287–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Storr, V. H. (2008). The market as a social space: On the meaningful extraeconomic conversations that can take place in markets. Review of Austrian Economics, 21(2–3), 135–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Swedberg, R. (1994). Markets as social structures. In N. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology (pp. 255–282). Princeton University Press: Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Vaughn, K. I. (1994). Austrian economics in America: The migration of a tradition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Wagner, R. E. (1999). Austrian cycle theory: Saving the wheat and discarding the chaff. Review of Austrian Economics, 12(1), 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Zwirn, G. (2007). Methodological individualism or methodological atomism: The case of Friedrich Hayek. History of Political Economy, 39(1), 47–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Solomon Stein.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stein, S., Storr, V.H. The market as foreground: The ontological status of the market in market process theory. Rev Austrian Econ (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-020-00535-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Critical realism
  • Heterodox economics
  • Market process theory
  • Social ontology

JEL classification

  • B13
  • B20
  • B53
  • D40
  • Z13