著者
西林 勝吾
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.55, no.1, pp.53-74, 2013 (Released:2019-08-23)

In this paper, I place A. V. Kneeseʼs water quali-ty management system into a lineage of “exter-nal diseconomy.” Although Kneese is recog-nized as one of the most influential environmen-tal economists by some scholars, his work has fallen out of favor. However, his arguments are still effective when we examine the problem of modern environmental pollution. Environmental pollution is classified as an external diseconomy, a concept that is generally acknowledged to have originated in A. C. Pig-ouʼs book, The Economics of Welfare. To reme-dy the problem of external diseconomy, tradi-tional approaches in the Pigouvian and Coasean tradition have suggested “Pigouvian taxes” or the “Coase Theorem.” Kneese critically ad-dressed both theories and the prevailing policy tools pertaining to water quality management by considering water pollution in 1960s United States. Kneeseʼs work on water quality management has been characterized in the following manner: “Kneese is the first economist after Pigou to treat externalities analytically and, at the same time, express a serious concern for pollution.” As stated above, Kneeseʼs work is based on the concept of external diseconomy. However, there is a clear difference between how Pigou and Kneese conceptualize the effects of external dis-economy. The nature of this difference lies in the criticism of external diseconomy by W. K. Kapp and R. H. Coase. Kapp criticized external diseconomy by arguing the concept of “social cost” from the standpoint of “institutional eco-nomics,” and Coase criticized it by arguing the concept of “transaction cost” from the standpoint of “new-institutional economics.” Kneeseʼs ex-ternality argument, which was influenced by the criticism of Kapp and Coase, takes both “institu-tional” and “new-institutional” standpoints. JEL classification numbers: B 15, Q 50.
著者
髙 哲男
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.55, no.1, pp.75-85, 2013 (Released:2019-08-23)

The rapid economic growth from the late 19th century in America was achieved with policies representing ʻAmerican Exceptionalism.ʼ It jus-tified the protection of infant industries to make America independent from the old and feudalistic European Powers. The main econom-ic policies consisted of the internal laissez-fair and the external protectionism. American eco-nomic thought was obliged to change from the traditional field of moral philosophy to explain-ing practical economic policies when modern scientific technologies created the emergency of labor management conflict in factories employ-ing high industrial productivity and a mass of unskilled labors. The outbreak of the so-called social problem promoted the establishment of economic depart-ment in universities, educating new business men for managing new large industries and oth-er public services. The universities required the training of faculty members to teach graduate courses. In the graduate courses of economics, main textbooks sifted from J. S. Millʼs Principles to A. Marshallʼs Economics and the writings of German Historical School. Since graduate stu-dents wanted to learn practical economics, seek-ing appropriate policies for solving social prob-lems, studentʼs research works into fundamental theories and thoughts of economics slighted. This situation began to change in the 1920ʼs, when economists and graduate students began to seek new methods to achieve a theoretically uni-fied system of economics appropriate for the American economy. The making of American economics, therefore, indispensably accompa-nied with the study of the economic thoughts in order to ascertain its origins and significances in the historical studies, and not a few outstanding works were written at that time. JEL classification numbers: B 1, B 13, B 15.
著者
奥山 誠
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.55, no.1, pp.86-104, 2013 (Released:2019-08-23)

The purpose of this paper is to survey German and Japanese studies of Werner Sombartʼs thought during the past 20 years. The Heilbronn Conference in 1991, organized by Jürgen Back-haus, led to a Sombart revival that followed “a renaissance of the German Historical School” in the 1980s. Many scholars were encouraged to reconsider the contributions of Sombart to the development of German economics. Section I of this paper offers an explanation of why an energetic rediscovery of Sombart has occurred in the past 20 years. Section II proffers commentary on three excellent books and arti-cles on Sombart published in Germany (Appel 1992; Brocke 1992; Lenger 1994). These three works deserve to be discussed in detail because they provide fresh insights into Sombartʼs life, academic achievements, and his influence on contemporaries as well as later generations. In addition, the three volumes edited by Backhaus (1996 a; 1996 b; 1996 c) that summarize the re-sults of the Heilbronn conference are noted, along with the work of Takebayashi (2003), which is one of the most valuable studies focus-ing on Sombart and Weber during the past dec-ade. Section III considers recent publications on Sombart in Japan. Since the late 1990s, Japanese Sombart studies concerning the history of eco-nomic thought have been on the rise, perhaps in-spired by the outstanding studies in Germany that occurred nearly a decade earlier. Tamura(1996; 1997; 1998), Yanagisawa (1998; 2001), Makino (2003), and a few emerging scholars will be reviewed here. In this section, the rela-tive novelty of recent Japanese studies on Som-bart is elucidated in comparison with that of re-cent German scholarship. Section IV provides suggestions as to what subjects may merit fur-ther exploration in the future. JEL classification numbers: B 15, B 21, B 31.
著者
尾崎 邦博
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.2, pp.29-44, 2013 (Released:2019-08-22)

John Atkinson Hobson, the leading theorist of the New Liberalism, is known as a sharp critic of imperialism. As is well known, the formative period of his social and political thought coin-cided with the heyday of social evolution theory. The purpose of this paper is to ascertain to what extent his theory of imperialism was under the influence of that theory. In his search for a remedy for the diseases of modern industrial societies, which were under the dominion of machine production and the law of diminishing returns, he proposed to substitute qualitative for quantitative methods of consump-tion. Thus, he adopted a qualitative view of social progress, insisting that by improving the charac-ter of consumption, the law of diminishing re-turns could be defeated, whereas the biological defenders of imperialism, such as Benjamin Kidd and Karl Pearson, maintained a quantitative view of progress, assuming that social effi-ciency and racial success were to be measured in square miles of territory within the empire. While claiming that the struggle for exist-ence within a society should be suspended for such a society to be able to compete successfully with another society, Pearson argued that the primitive struggle for physical existence was the best method for securing progress for the society of nations, which could be called humanity. In refuting Pearsonʼs view of progress, Hob-son asked why such a view, which claimed to put down the struggle for life among individuals and enlarge the area of social internal peace un-til it covered a whole nation, should not claim to extend its mode of progress to the complete so-ciety of the human race. JEL classification numbers: B 14, B 15.
著者
寺尾 範野
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.2, pp.45-61, 2013 (Released:2019-08-22)
被引用文献数
1 1

This paper examines British new liberal thinker L.T. Hobhouseʼs (1864―1929) views on social reform with a particular focus on the connection between his early economic thought on volun-tary organizations and his later ethical theory of distributive justice, and demonstrates that these aspects of his thought were theoretically com-plementary, together composing Hobhouseʼs life-long pursuit of the moralization of capital-ism. In the 1890s, Hobhouse already shared with contemporaneous new liberals several moralistic concerns over the issue of social reform. They all (1) thought of the development of morality as the fundamental aim of social reform and (2) emphasized the stateʼs duty to provide individu-als with the legal conditions necessary for moral development. Early in his career, Hobhouse fo-cused on the first point, identifying trade unions and co-operative societies as effective agencies for instilling in workers the values of fellowship and mutual aid. Hobhouse developed his ideas on state inter-ference after the 1910s, particularly from the perspective of distributive justice. Individuals were considered to have reciprocal rights and duties in relation to others and the state: they were seen as having the right to demand legal, material and social conditions sufficient for de-veloping their moral personalities and the duty to undertake their own social functions. A just distribution ensured by the state was seen as be-ing one that was capable of maintaining the per-formance of such functions. Hobhouse saw the roles of intermediate or-ganizations and the state as complementary, thus developing new liberal thought on social reform from a pluralistic-cum-moralistic perspective. To what extent this “ethical welfare pluralism” was common at the turn of the century would be a question worth examining in the historical study of the British welfare state. JEL classification numbers: B 19, B 31, I 31.
著者
佐藤 滋正
出版者
The Japanease Society for the History of Economic Thought
雑誌
経済学史研究 (ISSN:18803164)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.54, no.2, pp.62-71, 2013 (Released:2019-08-22)

Abstract: This paper is an outline of studies on the political economist David Ricardo in Japan after World War II. Japanese studies on Ricardo have followed the Japanese tradi-tional learning style of thoroughly reading the original texts, and recent research has broadened to include Ricardoʼs contemporaries. Additionally, and particularly since the foundation of the Ricardo Society in Japan in 2000, researchers have endeavored to send their information to other countries. In the first section of this paper, I survey the articles about Ricardo, and in the second section, I trace the historical progress of Japanese studies. I divide their approximately 70 years of Japanese research into three periods: the postwar period to the 1960s, the 1970s to the 1980s, and the 1990s to today. The final section contains perspectives on Japanese studies on Ricardo. JEL classification numbers: A 12, B 12, B 31.