Abstract
The social sciences have been divided into departmental silos for far too long, yielding at best partial insights among economists, political scientists, and sociologists. The most influential attempt at integration, economic imperialism, distorted our understanding of processes with looser constraints than among producers in competitive markets. The theory of spontaneous order, first developed by Michael Polanyi and Friedrich Hayek in the 1940s and 1950s, offers a more promising framework for interdisciplinary social theory. It does not rely on unrealistic assumptions of maximizing behavior, unlike rational choice theory borrowed from neoclassical economics. It is compatible with psychological findings on human behavior, recognizes the heterogeneity of resources and constraints in different social orders, and pays attention to historical processes of individual and social learning. Spontaneous-order theory provides a unified framework for four key orders of decentralized human interaction: the cultural, democratic, market, and scientific orders. Each such order is associated with order-specific resources. Order participants face constraints, but these constraints are not always the same, even within the same order. For example, competing producers face relatively tight break-even constraints, which make their actions unusually predictable. In contrast, consumers in a market order or politicians in a democracy face looser constraints. They are not compelled to maximize utilities or votes, but their relatively loose constraints nevertheless make many potential actions infeasible. Consumption requires money and policies require votes and resources. Exact predictions become impossible, but spontaneous-order analyses offer the promise of more reliable pattern predictions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andersson, Å. E. (1985). Kreativitet: StorStadens framtid. Stockholm, Sweden: Prisma.
Andersson, Å. E., & Andersson, D. E. (2015). Creative cities and the new global hierarchy. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, 8(3), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12061-015-9141-7
Andersson, D. E. (2008). Property rights, consumption and the market process. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781848444874
Andersson, D. E. (2021). Introduction to spontaneous order. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Center for Market Education.
Andersson, D. E., & Taylor, J. A. (2012). Institutions, agglomeration economies, and interstate migration. In D. E. Andersson (Ed.), The spatial market process (pp. 233–263). Bingley, UK: Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1529-2134(2012)0000016012.
Becker, G. S. (1973). A theory of marriage, part 1. Journal of Political Economy, 81(4), 813–846. https://doi.org/10.1086/260084
Buchanan, J. M., Tollison, R. D., & Tullock, G. (Eds.). (1980). Toward a theory of the rent-seeking society. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.
Beugelsdijk, S., & Welzel, C. (2018). Dimensions and dynamics of national culture: Synthesizing Hofstede with Inglehart. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(10), 1469–1505. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022118798505
Blaug, M. (2003). The formalist revolution of the 1950s. Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 25(2), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/1042771032000083309
diZerega, G. (1989). Democracy as a spontaneous order. Critical Review, 3(2), 206–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913818908459563
diZerega, G. (2004). Toward a Hayekian theory of commodification and systemic contradiction: Citizens, consumers, and the media. The Review of Politics, 66(3), 445–468. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034670500038869
Earl, P. E. (1983). The economic imagination: towards a behavioural theory of choice. Brighton, UK: Wheatsheaf.
Harper, D. A. (1995). Entrepreneurship and the market process: An enquiry into the growth of knowledge. London, UK: Routledge.
Hayek, F. A. (1945). The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812701275_0025
Hayek, F. A. (1960). The constitution of liberty. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Hayek, F. A. (1973). Law, legislation and liberty, volume 1: rules and order. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Hayek, F. A. (1988). The fatal conceit: The errors of socialism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Hirshleifer, J. (1985). The expanding domain of economics. American Economic Review, 75(6), 53–68.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press.
Kirzner, I. M. (1973). Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Kirzner, I. M. (1999). Rationality, entrepreneurship and economic imperialism. In S. C. Dow & P. E. Earl (Eds.), Economic organization and economic knowledge (pp. 258–272). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Koppl, R., & Whitman, D. G. (2004). Rational-choice hermeneutics. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 55(3), 295–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2003.07.006
O’Driscoll, G. P., & Rizzo, M. J. (1996). The economics of time and ignorance, with a new introduction. London, UK: Routledge.
Polanyi, M. (1941). The growth of thought in society. Economica, 8(32), 428–456. https://doi.org/10.2307/2550108
Polanyi, M. (1951). The logic of liberty. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Polanyi, M. (1962). The republic of science: Its economic and political theory. Minerva, 1, 54–73.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Stigler, G. J. (1992). Law or economics? Journal or Law & Economics, 35(2), 455–468. https://doi.org/10.1086/467262
Weintraub, E. R. (2002). How economics became a mathematical science. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Andersson, D.E. Spontaneous Order and the Hayekian Challenge to Interdisciplinary Social Scientists. Atl Econ J 49, 363–375 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11293-022-09735-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11293-022-09735-8