著者

金子 創

出版者

経済学史学会

雑誌

経済学史研究 (ISSN:18803164)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.56, no.1, pp.71-88, 2014 (Released:2019-08-24)

---

Abstract: This study focuses on Richard Cantillonʼs and Anne Robert Jacques Turgotʼs theories of the entrepreneur in order to revisit the conceptual structure of classical economic thought found-ed by Adam Smith. The frameworks of the classical concept of profit, assumed by Cantillon and Turgot are each examined to determine the following four issues: (a) whether a surplus of income over a given subsistence consumption level is distributed to an agent and whether it is saved accordingly; (b) whether and under what kinds of opportunity savings are invest-ed; (c) whether capital accumulation is attained as a consequence of investment; and (d) whether and how a surplus is accrued. Cantillon made four key assumptions in his work. First, he assumed that even if a sur-plus is distributed to an entrepreneur, it is not always saved. Secondly, whenever a surplus is saved, the savings are used only to buy land. Next, because savings are used only for land purchases, capital accumulation is hardly attained. Lastly, the surplus accrued by an entrepre-neur is due to his risk-taking behavior. By contrast, Turgot assumed that an entrepreneur normally saves the surplus that is dis-tributed to him, and that saving is not only used to buy land, but also used for productive in-vestment. He also assumed that because of this productive investment, capital accumulation can be achieved and that an entrepreneur could accrue a surplus from his risk-bearing, provi-sion of advanced labor service, or investment. This research, which takes into consideration each of their assumptions on the long-run state, provides a precise comparison between their frameworks of analysis of the entrepre-neur. Furthermore, this comparison makes it possible to explain that the foundation of the classical framework was related to a change in the assumptions on the behavior of an eco-nomic agent. JEL classification numbers: B 11, B 12.

著者

金子 創

出版者

経済学史学会

雑誌

経済学史研究 (ISSN:18803164)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.54, no.1, pp.82-99, 2012 (Released:2019-08-22)

---

The purpose of this article is to reinterpret Rich-ard Cantillonʼs concept of “profit” described in his Essai sur la nature du commerce en général (1755). It examines the conceptual relation between profit and Cantillonʼs two notions “intrin-sic value” and “entrepreneur.” By examining Prendergastʼs (1991) two possible interpretations of the relation of profit with the intrinsic value of a commodity and Brewerʼs (1992) discussion of entrepreneursʼ credit-worthiness, it is shown that Cantillonʼs profit interpreted by Prendergast is constructed of certain and uncertain parts. Certain part of the profit accruing to a commodity producer is the difference between the producerʼs labor value and subsistence level, and uncertain part, which characterizes the producer as an entrepreneur, is the balance between the sales price and the in-trinsic value of a commodity. This construction enables us to interpret Cantillonʼs profit with reference to entrepre-neursʼ labor value and to provide restrictive defi-nitions of Cantillonʼs notions of intrinsic value and entrepreneur. These restrictive definitions, which take into consideration the idea of long-run equilibrium price, indicate that Cantillonʼs notions of intrin-sic value and entrepreneur differ from Adam Smithʼs versions of “natural price” and “employ-er,” respectively. It is shown that the state where-in the price of each commodity equalizes with its intrinsic value and the existence of an entre-preneur receiving uncertain profit are conceptu-ally incompatible in economies in Cantillonʼs ar-gument. Our interpretations represent an explanation for the conceptual change of profit from Cantil-lon to Smith. JEL classification numbers: B11, B31.