Hostname: page-component-599cfd5f84-z6fpd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T06:46:22.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction to the special issue on the future of institutional and evolutionary economics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2014

GEOFFREY M. HODGSON  and
J. W. STOELHORST
GEOFFREY M. HODGSON*
Affiliation:
Hertfordshire Business School, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK
J. W. STOELHORST*
Affiliation:
Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam, 1018 TV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
*
*Email: [email protected]
**Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

This special issue of the Journal of Institutional Economics on the future of institutional and evolutionary economics consists of this introduction, four full essays, and two sizeable comments. Ménard and Shirley (2014) and Ménard (2014) discuss the future of the new institutional economics, and their two essays are followed by a reflection by Hodgson. Winter (2014) and Witt (2014) discuss the future of evolutionary economics, and their essays are followed by a comment by Stoelhorst. Here, we introduce these essays and comments by putting them in a broader historical perspective. In particular, we trace the common origins of modern institutional and evolutionary economics, particularly in the work of Veblen, as well as important additional influences such as Schumpeter and Simon. We highlight how the two approaches became disconnected, and signal the possibility of, and need for, re-establishing closer connections between them. Possible elements of a future overlapping research programme are outlined.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 10 , Issue 4: The Future of Institutional and Evolutionary Economics , December 2014 , pp. 513 - 540
Copyright
Copyright © Millennium Economics Ltd 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acemoglu, D. and Johnson, S. (2005), ‘Unbundling Institutions’, Journal of Political Economy, 113 (5): 949–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., and Robinson, J. A. (2001), ‘The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation’, American Economic Review, 91 (5): 1369–1401.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., and Robinson, J. A. (2002), ‘Reversal of Fortune: Geography and Institutions in the Making of the Modern Income Distribution’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117 (4): 1231–1294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., and Robinson, J. A. (2005), ‘The Rise of Europe: Atlantic Trade, Institutional Change and Economic Growth’, American Economic Review, 95 (3): 546–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alchian, A. A. (1950), ‘Uncertainty, Evolution, and Economic Theory’, Journal of Political Economy, 58 (2): 211–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, H. E., Hodgson, G. M., Hull, D. L., Knudsen, T., Mokyr, J., and Vanberg, V. J. (2008), ‘In Defence of Generalized Darwinism’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 18 (5): 577–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amable, B. (2000), ‘Institutional Complementarity and Diversity of Social Systems of Innovation and Production’, Review of International Political Economy, 7 (4): 645–687.Google Scholar
Arthur, W. B. (2006), ‘Out-of-Equilibrium Economics and Agent-Based Modeling’, in Judd, Kenneth L., Tesfatsion, L., Intrigilator, Michael D., and Arrow, Kenneth J. (eds.), Handbook of Computational Economics, Vol. 2: Agent-Based Computational Economics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland, pp. 1551–1564.Google Scholar
Ayres, C. E. (1944), The Theory of Economic Progress, Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Ayres, C. E. (1958), ‘Veblen's Theory of Instincts Reconsidered’, in Dowd, Douglas F. (ed.), Thorstein Veblen: A Critical Appraisal, Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 25–37.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. (1997), ‘Ugly Currents in Modern Economics’, Options Politiques, 18(17): 3–8. (Extended and revised as Blaug, M. (2002), ‘Ugly Currents in Modern Economics’, Mäki, U. (ed.), Fact and Fiction in Economics: Models, Realism and Social Construction, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Blaug, M. (1998), ‘Disturbing Currents in Modern Economics’, Challenge, 41 (3): 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulding, K. E. (1981), Evolutionary Economics, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bowles, S., and Gintis, H. (2011), A Cooperative Species: Human Reciprocity and its Evolution, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1980), ‘Sociobiology, Culture and Economic Theory’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1 (1): 97–121.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1985), Culture and the Evolutionary Process, Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Button, G. (ed.) (1993), Technology in Working Order: Studies of Work, Interaction and Technology, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Camic, C. and Hodgson, G. M. (eds.) (2011), Essential Writings of Thorstein Veblen, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carter, R. and Hodgson, G. M. (2006), ‘The Impact of Empirical Tests of Transaction Cost Economics on the Debate on the Nature of the Firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 27 (5): 461–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, J. M. (1918), ‘Economics and Modern Psychology Parts I and II’, Journal of Political Economy, 26 (1–2): 1–30, 136–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coase, R. H. (1937), ‘The Nature of the Firm’, Economica, 4: 386–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coase, R. H. (1984), ‘The New Institutional Economics’, Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 140: 229–231.Google Scholar
Commons, J. R. (1924), Legal Foundations of Capitalism, New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Commons, J. R. (1934), Institutional Economics – Its Place in Political Economy, New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cooley, C. H. (1902), Human Nature and the Social Order, New York, NY: Scribner's.Google Scholar
Cravens, H. (1978), The Triumph of Evolution: American Scientists and the Hereditary-Environment Controversy, 1900–1941, Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Crawford, S. E. S. and Ostrom, E. (1995), ‘A Grammar of Institutions’, American Political Science Review, 89 (3): 582–600.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963), A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. R. (1859), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, London: Murray.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, P. (2002), ‘Modern Economics and its Critics’, in Mäki, Uskali (ed.), Fact and Fiction in Economics: Models, Realism and Social Construction, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 57–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1983), ‘Universal Darwinism’, in Bendall, D. S. (ed.), Evolution from Molecules to Man, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 403–425.Google Scholar
Degler, C. N. (1991), In Search of Human Nature: The Decline and Revival of Darwinism in American Social Thought, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dopfer, K. (2004), ‘The Economic Agent as Rule Maker and Rule User: Homo Sapiens Oeconomicus’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14 (2): 177–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dopfer, K., Foster, J., and Potts, J. (2004), ‘Micro-Meso-Macro’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14 (3): 263–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorfman, J. (1955), ‘The Role of the German Historical School in American Economic Thought’, American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), 45 (2): 17–28.Google Scholar
Dosi, G. (1982), ‘Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change’, Research Policy, 11 (3): 147–162.Google Scholar
Dosi, G. (2000), Innovation, Organization and Industrial Dynamics, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R., Silverberg, G., and Soete, L. L. G. (eds.) (1988), Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Dosi, G. and Marengo, L. (2000), ‘On the Tangled Discourse between Transaction Cost Economics and Competence-Based Views of the Firm: Some Comments’, in Foss, Nicolai, and Mahnke, U. (eds.), Competence, Governance and Entrepreneurship, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 80–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, R. I. M. (2011), ‘Constraints on the Evolution of Social Institutions and their Implications for Information Flow’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 7 (3): 345–371.Google Scholar
Dunn, S. P. (2011), The Economics of John Kenneth Galbraith: Introduction, Persuasion, and Rehabilitation, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Earl, P. E. (2010), ‘Economics fit for the Queen: A Pessimistic Assessment of its Prospects’, Prometheus, 28 (3): 209–225.Google Scholar
Eaton, B. C. (1984), Review of An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change by R. R. Nelson and S. G. Winter, Canadian Journal of Economics, 17 (4): 868–871.Google Scholar
Ebner, A. (2000), ‘Schumpeter and the “Schmollerprogramm: Integrating Theory and History in the Analysis of Economic Development’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10 (3): 355–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edquist, C. (ed.) (1997), Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Forest, J. and Mehier, C. (2001), ‘John R. Commons and Herbert Simon on the Concept of Rationality’, Journal of Economic Issues, 35 (3): 591–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foss, N. J. (1993), ‘Theories of the Firm: Contractual and Competence Perspectives’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 3 (2): 127–144.Google Scholar
Foss, N. J. (2001), ‘Evolutionary Theories of the Firm: Reconstruction and Relations to Contractual Theories’, in Dopfer, Kurt (ed.), Evolutionary Economics: Program and Scope, Boston, MA: Kluwer, pp. 319–355.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. (1953), ‘The Methodology of Positive Economics’, in Friedman, M. (ed.), Essays in Positive Economics, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 3–43.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. K. (1952), American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. K. (1958), The Affluent Society, London: Hamilton.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. K. (1969), The New Industrial State, Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1971), The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gintis, H. (2009), The Bounds of Reason: Game Theory and the Unification of the Behavioral Sciences, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. H. (1916), ‘The Development of Hoxie's Economics’, Journal of Political Economy, 24 (9): 855–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, W. H. (1919), ‘The Institutional Approach to Economic Theory’, American Economic Review, 9 (Supplement): 309–318.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. (1967), ‘Notes on the Evolution of Systems of Rules of Conduct’, in Hayek, Friedrich A. (ed.), Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayek, F. A. (1973), Law, Legislation and Liberty, Vol. 1: Rules and Order, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Herbst, J. (1965), The German Historical School in American Scholarship: A Study in the Transfer of Culture, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (1993), Economics and Evolution: Bringing Life Back Into Economics, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (1994), ‘Optimisation and Evolution: Winter's Critique of Friedman Revisited’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 18 (4): 413–430.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (1997a), ‘The Evolutionary and Non-Darwinian Economics of Joseph Schumpeter’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 7 (2): 131–145.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (1997b), ‘The Ubiquity of Habits and Rules’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 21 (6): 663–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2001), How Economics Forgot History: The Problem of Historical Specificity in Social Science, London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2002), ‘Darwinism in Economics: From Analogy to Ontology’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12 (2): 259–281.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2004), The Evolution of Institutional Economics: Agency, Structure and Darwinism in American Institutionalism, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2007), ‘Taxonomizing the Relationship between Biology and Economics: A Very Long Engagement’, Journal of Bioeconomics, 9 (2): 169–185.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2011), ‘A Philosophical Perspective on Contemporary Evolutionary Economics’, in Davis, John B., and Wade Hands, D. (eds.), The Elgar Companion to Recent Developments in Economic Methodology, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar pp. 299–318.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2013), From Pleasure Machines to Moral Communities: An Evolutionary Economics Without Homo Economicus, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2014), ‘On Fuzzy Frontiers and Fragmented Foundations: Some Reflections on the Original and New Institutional Economics’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 10 (4) doi:10.1017/S1744137414000307 (published online).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. and Huang, K. (2012), ‘Evolutionary Game Theory and Evolutionary Economics: Are they Different Species?’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 22: 345–366.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M., Järvinen, J., and Lamberg, J.-A. (2013), ‘The Structure and Evolution of Evolutionary Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Literature in Management, Economics, and Sociology’, Paper Presented at the 25th Annual EAEPE Conference, Paris, France, 7–9 November.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. and Knudsen, T. (2006), ‘Dismantling Lamarckism: Why Descriptions of Socio-Economic Evolution as Lamarckian are Misleading’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 16 (4): 343–366.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. and Knudsen, T. (2010), Darwin's Conjecture: The Search for General Principles of Social and Economic Evolution, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. and Knudsen, T. (2012), ‘Generalized Darwinism and Evolutionary Economics: From Ontology to Theory’, Biological Theory, 2012, 6 (4): 326–337.Google Scholar
Homan, P. T. (1932), ‘An Appraisal of Institutional Economics’, American Economic Review, 22 (1): 10–17.Google Scholar
Hull, D. L. (1982), ‘The Naked Meme’, in Plotkin, Henry C. (ed.), Learning, Development and Culture: Essays in Evolutionary Epistemology, New York, NY: Wiley, pp. 273–327.Google Scholar
James, W. (1890), The Principles of Psychology, Vol 1 and 2, New York, NY: Holt and Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kapp, K. W. (1950), The Social Costs of Private Enterprise, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kirman, A. P. (2007), ‘Individual and Aggregate Behaviour: Of Ants and Men’, in Hodgson, Geoffrey M. (ed.), The Evolution of Economic Institutions: A Critical Reader, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 34–52.Google Scholar
Kitcher, P. (1993), The Advancement of Science: Science Without Legend, Objectivity Without Illusions, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Klaes, M. (2001), ‘Begriffsgeschichte: Between the Scylla of Conceptual and the Charybdis of Institutional History of Economics’, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 23 (2): 153–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornai, J. (1971), Anti-Equilibrium: On Economic Systems Theory and the Tasks of Research, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Krueger, A. O. (1991), ‘Report on the Commission on Graduate Education in Economics’, Journal of Economic Literature, 29 (3): 1035–1053.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langlois, R. N. (1992), ‘Transaction Cost Economics in Real Time’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 1 (1): 99–127.Google Scholar
Langlois, R. N. (2007), ‘The Entrepreneurial Theory of the Firm and the Theory of the Entrepreneurial Firm’, Journal of Management Studies, 44 (7): 1107–1124.Google Scholar
Lipsey, R. G., Carlaw, Kenneth I., and Bekar, Clifford T. (2005), Economic Transformations: General Purpose Technologies and Long Term Economic Growth, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundvall, B.-Å. (ed.) (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, London: Pinter.Google Scholar
McFarland, F. B. (1985), ‘Thorstein Veblen versus the Institutionalists’, Review of Radical Political Economics, 17 (4): 95–105.Google Scholar
McNulty, P. J. (1973), ‘Hoxie's Economics in Retrospect: The Making and Unmaking of a Veblenian’, History of Political Economy, 5 (3): 449–484.Google Scholar
Ménard, C. (2014), ‘Embedding Organizational Arrangements: Towards a General Model’, Journal of Institutional Economics, doi:10.1017/S1744137414000228 (published online).Google Scholar
Ménard, C. and Shirley, M. M. (2014), ‘The Future of New Institutional Economics: From Early Intuitions to a New Paradigm?’, Journal of Institutional Economics, doi:10.1017/S174413741400006X (published online).Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. S. (1994), ‘Evolutionary Economics and Technology Policy’, Economic Journal, 104 (4): 931–44.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. S. (1995), ‘Technology Systems and Technology Policy in an Evolutionary Framework’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19 (1): 25–46.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. S. (1998), Evolutionary Economics and Creative Destruction, London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaelides, P. G. and Milios, J. G. (2009), ‘Joseph Schumpeter and the German Historical School’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33 (3): 495–516.Google Scholar
Milgrom, P. R. and Roberts, J. (1992), Economics, Organisation, and Management, London: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Myrdal, G. (1957), Economic Theory and Underdeveloped Regions, London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Myrdal, G. (1968), Asian Drama: An Inquiry into the Poverty of Nations, New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. (ed.) (1993), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. (1995), ‘Recent Evolutionary Theorizing About Economic Change’, Journal of Economic Literature, 33 (1): 48–90.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. (2005), Technology, Institutions and Economic Growth, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Nelson, K. (2002), ‘Technology, Institutions, and Innovation Systems’, Research Policy, 31 (2): 265–272.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Sampat, B. N. (2001), ‘Making Sense of Institutions as a Factor Shaping Economic Performance’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 44 (1): 31–54.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1973), ‘Towards an Evolutionary Theory of Economic Capabilities’, American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), 63 (2): 440–449.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1974), ‘Neoclassical vs. Evolutionary Theories of Economic Growth: Critique and Prospectus’, Economic Journal, 84 (4): 886–905.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1977), ‘In Search of a Useful Theory of Innovation’, Research Policy, 6: 36–76.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, B. (1992), ‘Towards a Dynamic Theory of Transactions’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2 (4): 281–299.Google Scholar
North, D. C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
North, D. (2005), Understanding the Process of Economic Change, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2010), ‘The Sociomateriality of Organisational Life: Considering Technology in Management Research’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34 (1): 125–141.Google Scholar
Pagano, U. (1991), ‘Property Rights, Asset Specificity, and the Division of Labour Under Alternative Capitalist Relations’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 15 (3): 315–342. (Reprinted in Hodgson, 1993.)Google Scholar
Pagano, U. (1992), ‘Authority, Co-ordination and Disequilibrium: An Explanation of the Co-Existence of Markets and Firms’, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 3 (1): 53–77.Google Scholar
Pagano, U. (2011), ‘Interlocking Complementarities and Institutional Change’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 7 (3): 373–392.Google Scholar
Pagano, U. and Rowthorn, R. E. (1994), ‘Ownership, Technology and Institutional Stability’, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 5 (2): 221–242.Google Scholar
Parra, C. M. (2005), ‘Rules and Knowledge’, Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, 2 (1): 81–111.Google Scholar
Pelikan, P. (2011), ‘Evolutionary Developmental Economics: How to Generalize Darwinism Fruitfully to help Comprehend Economic Change’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 21 (2): 341–366.Google Scholar
Penrose, E. T. (1952), ‘Biological Analogies in the Theory of the Firm’, American Economic Review, 42 (4): 804–819.Google Scholar
Pessali, H. F. (2006), ‘The Rhetoric of Oliver Williamson's Transaction Cost Economics’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 2 (1): 45–65.Google Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1958), Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Potts, J. (2000), The New Evolutionary Microeconomics: Complexity, Competence and Adaptive Behaviour, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. G. (1896), ‘Social Evolution’, International Journal of Ethics, 6 (2): 165–181.Google Scholar
Rutherford, M. H. (1997), ‘American Institutionalism and the History of Economics’, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 19 (2): 178–195.Google Scholar
Rutherford, M. H. (1998), ‘Veblen's Evolutionary Programme: A Promise Unfulfilled’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 22 (4): 463–477.Google Scholar
Rutherford, M. H. (2001), ‘Institutional Economics: Then and Now’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15 (3): 173–194.Google Scholar
Rutherford, M. H. (2011), The Institutionalist Movement in American Economics, 1918–1947: Science and Social Control, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1918–1947.Google Scholar
Ruttan, V. W. (1997), ‘Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory and Path Dependence: Sources of Technical Change’, Economic Journal, 107 (5): 1520–1529.Google Scholar
Ruttan, V. W. (2006), ‘Social Science Knowledge and Induced Institutional Innovation: An Institutional Design Perspective’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 2 (3): 249–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saviotti, P. P. (1996), Technological Evolution, Variety and the Economy, Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Saviotti, P. P. and Nooteboom, B. (eds.) (2005), Technology and Knowledge: From the Firm to Innovation Systems, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Schaffer, M. E. (1989), ‘Are Profit-Maximisers the Best Survivors?: A Darwinian Model of Economic Natural Selection’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 12 (1): 29–45.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. A. ([1911, 1926] 1934), The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle, Redvers Opie (tr.), from the 2nd German edn., Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. A. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. (1995), The Construction of Social Reality, London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Silva, S. T. and Teixeira, A. A. C. (2009), ‘On the Divergence of Evolutionary Research Paths in the Past 50 years: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Account’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 19 (5): 605–642.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1947), Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization, New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1957), Models of Man: Social and Rational. Mathematical Essays on Rational Human Behavior in a Social Setting, New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1979), ‘Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations’, American Economic Review, 69 (4): 493–513.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1996), Letter to G. M. Hodgson of 26 January.Google Scholar
Stoelhorst, J. W. (2005), ‘The Naturalist View of Universal Darwinism: An Application to the Evolutionary Theory of the Firm’, in Finch, J., and Orillard, M. (eds.), Complexity and the Economy: Implications for Economic Policy, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 127–47.Google Scholar
Stoelhorst, J. W. (2008a), ‘Why is Management Not an Evolutionary Science? Evolutionary Theory in Strategy and Organization’, Journal of Management Studies, 45 (5): 1008–1023.Google Scholar
Stoelhorst, J. W. (2008b), ‘The Explanatory Logic and Ontological Commitments of Generalized Darwinism’, Journal of Economic Methodology, 15 (4): 343–363.Google Scholar
Stoelhorst, J. W. (2014), ‘The Future of Evolutionary Economics Is In a Vision from the Past, Journal of Institutional Economics, doi:10.1017/S174413741400037X (published online).Google Scholar
Stoelhorst, J. W. and Richerson, Peter J. (2013), ‘A Naturalistic Theory of Economic Organization’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 908: S45–S56.Google Scholar
Streissler, E. W. (1994), ‘The Influence of German and Austrian Economics on Joseph A. Schumpeter’, in Shionoya, Yuichi, and Perlman, Mark (eds.), Schumpeter in the History of Ideas, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. 13–38.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. and Pisano, G. (1994), ‘The Dynamic Capabilities of Firms: An Introduction’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 3 (3): 537–556.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. (1997), ‘Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management’, Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7): 509–533.Google Scholar
Tinbergen, N. (1963), ‘On Aims and Methods in Ethology’, Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 20: 410–433.Google Scholar
Tunzelmann, G. N. V. and Wang, Q. (2003), ‘An Evolutionary View of Dynamic Capabilities’, Économie appliquée, 56 (3): 33–64.Google Scholar
Tylecote, A. (2007), ‘The Role of Finance and Corporate Governance in National Systems of Innovation’, Organization Studies, 28 (10): 1461–1481.Google Scholar
Vanberg, V. J. (2002), ‘Rational Choice versus Program-Based Behavior: Alternative Theoretical Approaches and Their Relevance for the Study of Institutions’, Rationality and Society, 14 (1): 7–53.Google Scholar
Veblen, T. B. (1898a), ‘Why Is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 12 (3): 373–397. (Reprinted in Camic and Hodgson, 2011).Google Scholar
Veblen, T. B. (1898b), ‘The Instinct of Workmanship and the Irksomeness of Labor’, American Journal of Sociology, 4 (2): 187–201. (Reprinted in Camic and Hodgson, 2011).Google Scholar
Veblen, T. B. (1899), The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study in the Evolution of Institutions, New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Veblen, T. B. (1914), The Instinct of Workmanship, and the State of the Industrial Arts, New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Vromen, J. J. (2001), ‘Ontological Commitments and Evolutionary Economics’, in Mäki, Uskali (ed.), The Economic World View: Studies in the Ontology of Economics, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 189–224.Google Scholar
Waters, C. K. (1986), ‘Natural Selection without Survival of the Fittest’, Biology and Philosophy, 1 (2): 207–225.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Anti-Trust Implications: A Study in the Economics of Internal Organization, New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1985), The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting, London: Free Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1996), Review of Jack Vromen Economic Evolution, Economic Journal, 106 (6): 1791–1793.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (2000), ‘The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead’, Journal of Economic Literature, 38 (3): 595–613.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. Jr (1964), ‘Economic “Natural Selection” and the Theory of the Firm’, Yale Economic Essays, 4 (1): 225–272.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. Jr (1971), ‘Satisficing, Selection and the Innovating Remnant’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 85 (2): 237–261.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. Jr (2013), ‘Habit, Deliberation and Action: Strengthening the Microfoundations of Routines and Capabilities’, Academy of Management Perspectives, 27 (2): 120–137.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. Jr (2014), ‘The Future of Evolutionary Economics: Can We Break Out of the Beachhead?’,Journal of Institutional Economics, doi:10.1017/S1744137414000277 (published online).Google Scholar
Witt, U. (2002), ‘How Evolutionary is Schumpeter's Theory of Economic Development?’, Industry and Innovation, 9 (1/2): 7–22.Google Scholar
Witt, U. (2003), The Evolving Economy: Essays on the Evolutionary Approach to Economics, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Witt, U. (2004), ‘On the Proper Interpretations of “Evolution” in Economics and its Implications for Production Theory’, Journal of Economic Methodology, 11 (2): 125–146.Google Scholar
Witt, U. (2008), ‘What is Specific About Evolutionary Economics?’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 18: 547–575.Google Scholar
Witt, U. (2014), ‘The Future of Evolutionary Economics: Why the Modalities of Explanations Matter’, Journal of Institutional Economics, doi:10.1017/S1744137414000253 (published online).Google Scholar
Zuboff, S. (1988), In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power, Oxford, UK: Heinemann.Google Scholar