Social Economics and Evolutionary Institutionalism Today

References

• Arnsperger, C. (2010). Critical political economy: Complexity, rationality, and the logic of post-orthodox pluralism. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal, 99, 116–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axelrod, R. (1984/2006). The evolution of cooperation. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 284, 509–512.
   Google Scholar
• Bardhan, P., & Ray, I. (2008). Methodological approaches in economics and anthropology. In J. B. Davis & W. Dolfsma (Eds.), The Elgar companion to social economics (pp. 427–443). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, M (2007). The social atom. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, M. (2008, October 1). This economy does not compute. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/opinion/01buchanan.html?pagewanted = all&_r = 0.
   Google Scholar
• Bush, P. D. (1999). Art: “Recognized interdependence”. In P. A. O'Hara (Ed.), Encyclopedia of political economy (Vol. 2, pp. 963–964). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bush, P. D. (1987). The theory of institutional change. Journal of Economic Issues, 21, 1075–1116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush, P. D. (2008). Culture, values and institutions. In J. B. Davis & W. Dolfsma (Eds.), The Elgar companion to social economics (pp. 153–170). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, P. (2009, March 4). Ivory tower unswayed by crashing economy. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/05/books/05deba.html?_r = 2&.
   Google Scholar
• Colander, D., Holt, R., & Rosser, B. (2004). The changing face of mainstream economics. Review of Political Economy, 16, 485–499.
   Google Scholar
• Commons, J. R. (1934). Institutional economics: Its place in political economy (2 Vols). Macmillan: New York, NY. Repr. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publications, 1990.
   Google Scholar
• David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, Papers & Proceedings, 75, 332–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, J. B. (2003). The theory of the individual in economics: Identity and value. Routledge: London.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J. B. (2008a). Complex individuals: The individual in non-Euclidian space. In H. Hanappi & W. Elsner (Eds.), Advances in Evolutionary institutional economics: Evolutionary mechanisms, non-knowledge and strategy (pp. 123–142). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J. B. (2008b). The conception of the socially embedded individual. In J. B. Davis & W. Dolfsma (Eds.), The Elgar companion to social economics (pp. 92–105). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J. B. (2011). Individuals and identity in economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J. B., & Dolfsma, W. (Eds.). (2008). The Elgar companion to social economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• De Marchi, N. (Ed.). (1993). Non-natural social science: Reflecting on the enterprise of “more heat than light”. Annual supplement to History of Political Economy, Vol. 25. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Denis, A. (2009). Pluralism in economics education. International Review of Economic Education, 8, 6–21.
   Google Scholar
• Dolfsma, W., & Aalbers, R. (2008). Social networks: Structure and content. In J. B. Davis & W. Dolfsma (Eds.), The Elgar Companion to social economics (pp. 390–405). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Dosi, G., & Winter, S. G. (2000). Interpreting economic change: Evolution, structures and games. LEM Working Paper Series 2000/08, Pisa, Italy. Retrieved from http://ideas.repec.org/p/ssa/lemwps/2000-08.html.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. (1987). How institutions think. Routledge: London.
   Google Scholar
• Dow, S. (2009). History of thought and methodology in pluralist economics education. International Review of Pluralism in Economic Education, 8, 41–57.
   Google Scholar
• Duarte, P. G., & Lima, G. T. (Eds.). (2012). Microfoundations reconsidered: The relationship of micro and macroeconomics in historical perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Elsner, W. (2008). Art: “Market and state”. In P. A. O'Hara (Ed.), International encyclopedia of public policy  (Vol. III – Public Policy), Global Governance and Development. GPERU: Perth. Retrieved from http://pohara.homestead.com/Encyclopedia/Volume-3.pdf (pp. 370–389)
   Google Scholar
• Elsner, W. (2012). The theory of institutional change revisited. the institutional dichotomy, its dynamic, and its policy implications in a more formal analysis. Journal of Economic Issues, 46(1), 1–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsner, W. (2013). State and future of the ‘citadel’ and of the heterodoxies in economics: Challenges and dangers, convergences and cooperation. European Journal of Economics and Economic Policy (EJEEP), 10, 286–298.
   Google Scholar
• Elsner, W., & Heinrich, T. (2011). Coordination on “meso”-levels: On the co-evolution of institutions, networks and platform size. In S. Mann (Ed.), Sectors matter! Exploring mesoeconomics (pp. 115–163). Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Elsner, W., Heinrich, T., & Schwardt, H. (2014). Microeconomics of complex economies. evolutionary, institutional, neoclassical and complexity perspectives. San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Elsner, W., & Lee, F. (2010). Assessing economic research and the future of heterodox economics. Failures and alternatives of journals, departments, and scholars rankings'. Intervention. European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies, 7, 31–42.
   Google Scholar
• Elsner, W., & Schwardt, H. (2014). Trust and arena size. expectations, general trust, and institutions co-evolving, and their critical population and group sizes. some clarifications in a more formal perspective. Journal of Institutional Economics, 10, 107–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foley, D. K. (1998). Introduction. In PS Albin, DK Foley, & D. K. Foley (Eds.), Barriers and bounds to rationality: Essays on economic complexity and dynamics in interactive systems (pp. 3–72). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, J. (2005). From simplistic to complex systems in economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29, 873–892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fullbrook, E. (Ed.). (2009). Pluralist economics. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Garnett, R., Olsen, E., & Starr, M. (Eds.). (2009). Economic pluralism. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1971). The entropy law and the economic process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gintis, H. (2007). A framework for the unification of the behavioral sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(1), 1–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gintis, H. (2008). Five principles for the unification of the behavioral sciences. Retrieved from http://www.umass.edu/preferen/gintis/NewUnity.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Groenewegen, J. (Ed.). (2007). Teaching pluralism in economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, H, & Shaun, P. (2008). Individual preferences and decision-making. In J. B. Davis & W. Dolfsma (Eds.), The Elgar Companion to Social Economics (pp. 79–91). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Heinrich, T., & Schwardt, H. (2013). Institutional inertia and institutional change in an expanding normal-form game. Games, 4, 398–425.
   Google Scholar
• Henrich, J. (2004). Cultural group selection, coevolutionary process and large-scale cooperation. Journal of Economic Behavior&Organization, 53, 3–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henrich, J., Boyd, Ri., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., & Gintis, H. (2004). Foundations of human sociality: Economic experiments and ethnographic evidence from fifteen small-scale societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. (2000). From micro to macro: The concept of emergence and the role of institutions. In L. Burlamaqui (Ed.), Institutions and the role of the state (pp. 103–126). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. (2002). Reconstitutive downward causation: Social structure and the development of individual agency. In E Fullbrook (Ed.), Intersubjectivity in economics: Agents and structures (pp. 159–180). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. (2008). Art: “Markets”. In J. B. Davis & W. Dolfsma (Eds.), The Elgar companion to social economics (pp. 251–266). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. M., & Huang, K. (2012). Evolutionary game theory and evolutionary economics: Are they different species? Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 22, 345–366.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, M. O., & Zenou, Y. (Eds.). (2013). Economic analyses of social networks. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Kapeller, J. (2013). “Model platonism” in economics: On a classical epistemological critique. Journal of Institutional Economics, 9, 199–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapp, K. W. (1950). The social costs of private enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Keen, S. (2009). A pluralist approach to microeconomics. In J. Reardon (Ed.), The handbook of pluralist economics education (pp. 120–150). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kellert, S. H., Longino, H. E., & Kenneth Waters, C. (Eds.). (2006). Scientific pluralism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• King, J. E. (2012). The microfoundations delusion: Metaphor and dogma in the history of macroeconomics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, F., & Elsner, W. (2010). Editors' introduction to ‘evaluating economic research in a contested discipline: Rankings, pluralism, and the future of heterodox economics’, studies in economic reform and social justice. Special Issue of the American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 69(5), 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindgren, K. (1997). Evolutionary dynamics in game-theoretic models. In W. B. Arthur, S. N. Durlauf, & D. A. Lane (Eds.), The economy as an evolving complex system II (pp. 337–367). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Mayhew, A. (2008). Institutions, culture and values. In J. B. Davis & W. Dolfsma (Eds.), The Elgar companion to social economics (pp. 28–43). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Maynard Smith, J., & Price, G. R. (1973). The logic of animal conflict. Nature, 246, 15–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCloskey, D. N. (1985/1998). The rhetoric of economics (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mirowski, P. (1989). More heat than light: Economics as social physics, physics as nature's economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mirowski, P. (2010). Inherent vice: Minsky, Markomata, and the tendency of markets to undermine themselves. Journal of Institutional Economics, 6, 415–443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirowski, P. (2013). Never let a serious crisis go to waste: How neoliberalism survived the financial meltdown. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Neale, W. C. (1994). Art: “Institutions”. In G. M. Hodgson, W. J. Samuels, & M. R. Tool (Eds.), The Elgar companion to institutional and evolutionary economics (Vol. 1, pp. 402–406). Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. H. (2001). Economics as religion: From Samuelson to Chicago and beyond. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nowak, M. A. (2006). Evolutionary dynamics: Exploring the equations of life. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E., Walker, J., & Gardner, R. (1992). Covenants with and without a sword: Self-governance is possible. American Political Science Review, 86, 404–407.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. New York, NY: Rinehart.
   Google Scholar
• Polanyi, K. (1977). The economy embedded in society. In K. Polanyi & H. Pearson (Eds.), The livelihood of man (pp. 47–56). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reardon, J. (Ed.). (2009). Handbook of pluralist economics education. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Richerson, P., & Boyd, R. (2004). Not by genes alone: How culture transformed human evolution. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Salanti, A., & Screpanti, E. (Eds.). (1997). Pluralism in economics: New perspectives in history and methodology. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Salzano, M., & Colander, D. (Eds.). (2007). Complexity hints for economic policy. Milan: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Schotter, A. (1981). The economic theory of social institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. (1759/1976). The theory of moral sentiments. In D. D. Raphael & A. L. Macfie (Eds.), Oxford: Clarendon. Repr. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Tool, M. R. (1979). The discretionary economy: A normative theory of political economy. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Veblen, Thorstein B. (1898). Why is economics not an evolutionary science? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 12, 56–81.
   Google Scholar
• Vitali, S., Glattfelder, J. B., & Battiston, S. (2011). The network of global corporate control. PLoS One, 6. Retrieved from http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0025995.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature, 393, 440–442.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, E. O. (2012). The social conquest of earth. New York, NY: Liveright.
   Google Scholar
• Zenou, Y. (2012). Networks in economics. International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral science, CEPR Discussion Papers No. 9021. Retrieved from http://www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/lists/year/2012.asp.
   Google Scholar