5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Historical perspective and role of entrepreneurship in Austrian economics, January 8, 2009
This review is from: The Austrian School: Market Order and Entrepreneurial Creativity (Paperback)
Chapter 1: The comparison of the neo-classical economic principles and how its methodology differs from that of Austrian thinking has been explained in an excellent manner. The details are presented in tabular form which is easier and intuitive to understand for the beginner readers and undergraduate students (the most likely target readers "who wish to delve deeper", p. x). The only shortfall could be that chapter 1 relies heavily on criticizing the neo-classical approach and mathematical formalism in stead of concentrating on the philosophical origins of the school. The relevance of `libertarian principles' and `how the social conditions of early 20th century could have helped solidify the philosophical roots of Austrian school' are only mentioned in the later discussions. A beginner reader could even mistake that the Austrian school came into being just to provide a superior alternative to the neo-classical school. The author's sympathetic approach towards the neo-classical economic school is expressed in the conclusions of chapter 1 (p 15). But the author rejects a similar position elsewhere in the book (p 106).
Chapter 2: The discussion on dimensions of knowledge and definition of entrepreneurship offers a different and stimulating perspective on those important aspects of emerging economy. The author has taken considerable efforts to provide different etymological meanings of what entrepreneurship means through an exploration of the Spanish language roots of the word. The acceptance of his classification of the `two different types of knowledge' (table 2.1) entirely depends on the reader's orientation. The discussion of competition and entrepreneurship is unfortunately limited to less than two pages. The relationship between them and how government plays a role in controlling or limiting their interaction would require a great deal of attention for any new reader in Austrian economics (Kirzner, 1982); unfortunately, the book falls woefully short of that mark. The abject rejection of neo-classical economic models with mathematical basis even seems contradictory, since the author seems to accept the mathematically derived results on `limit on knowledge' (p 26).
Chapter 3: The discussion of scholars from the School of Salamanca during the Spanish Golden Age (chapter 3) seems to be one of the brightest spots in the entire book. It presents a comprehensive view going back up to 16th century, on who the forerunners of this economic thought were and specifically how the writings of Carl Menger had evolved in an attempt to provide alternative theories and methodologies (especially to contradict the logical positivist approach that was so widely used in neo-classical economics and applied socio-economic sciences). The author has captured the essence of libertarian principles that form a corner stone of Austrian thinking but the discussion could have proven much better if they were explicitly stated and discussed. I would have liked additional focus on the non-economic origins and implications of Austrian economic thinking. This chapter 3 singlehandedly provides a different flavor to the book - which is not surprising since the author has already written a lot on that subject matter (Huerta De Soto, 1999).
Chapter 4: For the beginner reader, knowing how Bohm-Bawerk's economic thinking differed from that of Marshall (section 4.5), Marx (4.6), John Bates Clark (4.7) and Friedrich von Wieser (4.8) would be beneficial. The Mises quote cited in section 4.8 shows one of the earliest contradictions of `who is considered to be an Austrian economist and who is not.' Pursuing this idea would also have enabled the readers on the ideological clashes among the various branches of today's Austrian economic thinking.
Chapter 5: In this chapter, the contributions of Mises on the impossibility of socialism and the importance of entrepreneurship are discussed based on his phenomenal works. The quote from Keynes (p 65) shows the respect that other schools of thought have long shared for the theories of Austrian school economists. The discussion on socialism and its downfall is a good review of Mises contributions in the form of subjective values and the resultant `human action.'
Chapter 6: F.A. Hayek's contributions became more significant in the light of Nobel Prize awarded to him in 1974 which led to the resurgence of the Austrian economic thinking. The author recognizes its importance by stating that the `upcoming years could be "described as the "Hayek era."' The brief biographies of both Mises and Hayek help the reader understand and appreciate the circumstances that led these men's thinking and contributions to the field of economics. The author's concise review of Hayek's theory of economic cycles (that led to Hayek's Nobel Prize) serves as a nice introduction to any beginner; it also brings out the dynamics of economic (dis)coordination which have since become to be known as one of the key contributions of Austrian school. The debates between Austrians and socialists, Keynes, Frank Knight and the Chicago school - all show how the Austrian school, under Hayek, has established its theoretical foundations and methodological differences. Table 6.1 presents more insightful comparison of the Austrian theme and how it differs from the neoclassical school - in line with that of table 1.1. The personal tidbits about Hayek's orientation towards religion (p 78) provide a glimpse into author's attempt to understand how the giants of the school might have formulated and possibly changed their ideas later.
Chapter 7: The last chapter provides a curt discussion of Chicago school's ideologies in section 7.1 (also some of it in section 6.3); it is note-worthy that section 7.1 (crisis in neo-classical approach) complements the earlier discussion of the success and predominance of neo-classical approach in section 4.9. If any instructor chooses to use sections of this book for class readings and discussions, such specific parts of this book can greatly serve that purpose. The reader's possible wish to know more about the works of recent scholars is appeased only with a cursory mention of their names and works in section 7.2. Although various names are given, their specific contributions are not explained to the reader. It is also not clear if that list is complete - a better way would have been to refer to some bibliographical work on the writings of Austrian economists.
The book ends with a detailed list of current research themes in Austrian economics (section 7.3). The suggestions show how these themes (competition, monopoly, institutional coercion, and welfare economics) are affected by entrepreneurship. Section 7.4 has author's replies to the comments and criticisms against the school in general - it also shows the author's expertise and contemporariness in the field. The focus of this section reverberates with the rest of the book with an ultimate message that Austrian perspective is better than the predominant neo-classical approach. The conclusions section are written only for chapters 1, 2, 5 and 7 - except for conclusions of chapters 1 and 7, others are not satisfactory for a quick review.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
