Advertisement

Unintended Consequences: Scottish Political Economy as a Reaction to Mercantilism

  • Aida Ramos
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in the History of Economic Thought book series (PHET)

Abstract

This chapter asserts that the vacuum left by the departure of the Scottish Parliament allowed Scotland’s other institutions to continue to develop, which helped to lay the groundwork for the emergence of the Scottish Enlightenment. Scotland’s changed economic circumstances and governance post-Union necessitated the emergence of Scottish political economy. The work of Sir James Steuart and Adam Smith is explored as a reaction against the worldview of mercantilism on growth, trade, poverty, and independence. Each author’s growth theory demonstrates a growth theory based on interdependence among individuals in society rather than the competition and dependence of nation-states. Rather than interference, the role of government is reassigned as one that supports commerce in the case of Smith and prevents crises in Steuart.

Keywords

Mercantilism Political economy Adam Smith Sir James Steuart Scottish Enlightenment Trade Growth Poverty Interdependence Development Government Governance 

References

  1. Anderson, G., and R. Tollison. 1984. Sir Steuart James Steuart as the Apotheosis of Mercantilism and His Relation to Adam Smith. Southern Economic Journal 51 (2): 456–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cantillon, R. 1755. Essay on the Nature of Commerce in General. London: Fletcher Gyles.Google Scholar
  3. Furniss, E.S. 1920. The Position of the Laborer in a System of Nationalism. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  4. Hayek, F. 1945. The Use of Knowledge in Society. The American Economic Review 35 (4): 519–530.Google Scholar
  5. Hutchison, T. 1988. Before Adam Smith: The Emergence of Political Economy 1662–1776. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. Lewis, T. 2000. Domination and Exchange: Adam Smith on the Political Consequences of Markets. Canadian Journal of Political Science 33 (2): 273–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Magnusson, L. 1994. Mercantilism: The Shaping of an Economic Language. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ramos, A. 2007. Economy, Empire, and Identity: Rethinking the Origins of Political Economy in Sir James Steuart’s Principles of Political Economy, Doctoral diss. Notre Dame, USA: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
  9. Rashid, S. 1986. Smith, Steuart, and Mercantilism: Comment. Southern Economic Journal 52 (3): 843–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Skinner, A. 1999. Introduction: Sir James Steuart: The Jacobite Connection. In The Economics of James Steuart, ed. R. Tortajada, 1–23. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Smith, A. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 1976. The Theory of Moral Sentiments, eds. D.D. Raphael and A.L. Macfie. Oxford: Oxford University Press; Glasgow edition. Reprinted, Liberty Press (1982).Google Scholar
  13. ———. 1978. Lectures on Jurisprudence, eds. R.L. Meek, D.D. Raphael, and P.G. Stein. Oxford: Oxford University Press; Glasgow edition.Google Scholar
  14. Steuart, J. 1767. An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Economy. London: A. Millar and T. Cadell.Google Scholar
  15. Wiles, R. 1968. The Theory of Wages in later English Mercantilism. Economic History Review 21 (1): 113–126.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aida Ramos
    • 1
  1. 1.University of DallasIrvingUSA

Personalised recommendations