Formal Approaches to Socio-economic Analysis—Past and Perspectives

References

• Albin, P, & Foley, D. K. (1992). Decentralized, dispersed exchange without an auctioneer. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 18, 27–51. doi:10.1016/0167-2681(92)90051-C.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvarez-Pereira, B., Bale, C. S. E., Furtado, B. A., Gentile, J. E., Gräbner, C., Henderson, H., & Lipari, F. (March 2015). Social institutions and economic inequality: Modeling the onset of the Kuznets curve. Ipea Working Paper 204.
   Google Scholar
• Bassi, A. M. (2008). Modeling US energy policy with threshold 21. Saarbrucken: VDM.
   Google Scholar
• Bunge, M. (2004). How does it work?: The search for explanatory mechanisms. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34, 182–210. doi:10.1177/0048393103262550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush, P. D. (1987). The theory of institutional change. Journal of Economic Issues, 21, 1075–1116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, S. -H. (2012). Varieties of agents in agent-based computational economics: A historical and an interdisciplinary perspective. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 36, 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, S. -H., Chang, C. -L., & Du, Y. -R. (2012). Agent-based economic models and econometrics. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 27, 187–219. doi:10.1017/S0269888912000136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delli Gatti, D., Gaffeo, E., Gallegati, M., Giulioni, G., Kirman, A., Palestrini, A., & Russo, A. (2007). Complex dynamics and empirical evidence. Information Sciences, 177, 1204–1221. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2006.08.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsner, W. (2012). Microeconomics of interactive economies: Evolutionary, institutional, and complexity perspectives: A “non-toxic” intermediate textbook. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Elsner, W., & Heinrich, T. (2009). A simple theory of “meso”: On the co-evolution of institutions and platform size—with an application to varieties of capitalism and “medium-sized” countries. Journal of Socio-Economics, 38, 843–858. doi:10.1016/j.socec.2009.05.001.
   Google Scholar
• Elsner, W., Heinrich, T., & Schwardt, H. (2014). The microeconomics of complex economies. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, J. M., & Axtell, R. L. (1996). Growing artificial societies: Social science from the bottom up. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fiddaman, T. S. (2002). Exploring policy options with a behavioral climate-economy model. System Dynamics Review, 18, 243–267. doi:10.1002/sdr.241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Field, A. J. (1994). Game theory and institutions. In G. M. Hodgson, W. J. Samuels, & M. R. Tool (Eds.), The Elgar companion to institutional and evolutionary economics (pp. 271–276). Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Forrester, J. W. (1971). Counterintuitive behavior of social systems. Technology Review, 73, 52–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forrester, J. W. (1985). The “model” versus a modeling “process”. System Dynamics Review, 1, 133–134. doi:10.1002/sdr.4260010112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fullwiler, S. T., Eisner, W., & Natarajan, T. (2009). The social fabric matrix approach to policy analysis: An introduction. In T. Natarajan, W. Elsner, & S. T. Fullwiler (Eds.), Institutional analysis and praxis: The social fabric matrix approach (pp. 1–23). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Galbraith, J. K. (1967). The new industrial state. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Geanakoplos, J., Axtell, R., Farmer, J. D., Howitt, P., Conlee, B., Goldstein, J., … Yang, C. -Y. (2012). Getting at systemic risk via an agent-based model of the housing market. American Economic Review, 102, 53–58. doi:10.1257/aer.102.3.53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gräbner, C. (2015). Methodology does matter: About implicit assumptions in applied formal modelling. The case of dynamic stochastic general equilibrium models vs agent-based models. Technical report, MPRA paper 63003.
   Google Scholar
• Gräbner, C. (2015 forthcoming). Agent-based computational models: A formal heuristic for institutionalist pattern modelling? Journal of Institutional Economics.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayden, F. G. (1982). Social fabric matrix: From perspective to analytical tool. Journal of Economic Issues, 16, 637–662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayden, F. G. (2006a). Policymaking for a good society: The social fabric matrix approach to policy analysis and program evaluation. Springer: New York.
   Google Scholar
• Hayden, F. G. (2006b). The inadequacy of Forrester system dynamics computer programs for institutional principles of hierarchy, feedback, and openness. Journal of Economic Issues, 40, 527–535.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayden, F. G., & Bolduc, S. R. (2000). Contracts and costs in a corporate/government system dynamics network: A United States case. In W. Elsner & J. Groenewegen (Eds.), Industrial policies after 2000 (pp. 235–284). Boston: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Hédoin, C. (2010). Did Veblen generalize Darwinism (and why does it matter)?. Journal of Economic Issues, 963–990. doi:10.2753/JEI0021-3624440406.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hicks, J. R. (1934). Leon Walras. Econometrica, 2, 338–348. doi:10.2307/1907106.
   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. (2013a). From pleasure machines to moral communities: An evolutionary economics without homo economicus. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. M. (2013b). Editorial introduction to the Elinor Ostrom memorial issue. Journal of Institutional Economics, 9, 381–385. doi:10.1017/S1744137413000283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. M., & Knudsen, T. (2004). The complex evolution of a simple traffic convention: The functions and implications of habit. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 54, 19–47. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2003.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. M., & Knudsen, T. (2010). Darwin's conjecture: The search for general principles of social and economic evolution. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, J. L., & Hayden, F. G. (2007). Using the social fabric matrix to analyze institutional rules relative to adequacy in education funding. Journal of Economic Issues, 41, 359–367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jo, T. -H. (2011). Social provisioning process and socio-economic modeling. American Journal Of Economics and Sociology, 70, 1094–1116. doi:10.1111/j.1536-7150.2011.00808.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapeller, J. (2015). Beyond foundations: Systemism in economic thinking. In T.-H. Jo & Z. Todorovka (Eds.), Frontiers in heterodox economics: Essays in honor of Frederic S. Lee. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lane, D. C. (2008). The emergence and use of diagramming in system dynamics: A critical account. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 25, 3–23. doi:10.1002/sres.826.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, F., & Cronin, B. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of research methods and applications in heterodox economics. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, F. S. (2011). Editor's introduction. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 70, 1089–1093. doi:10.1111/j.1536-7150.2011.00807.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindgren, K. (1992). Evolutionary phenomena in simple dynamics. In C. G. Langton, C. Taylor, J. D. Farmer, & S. Rasmussen (Eds.), Artificial life II: Santa Fe Institute Studies in the sciences of complexity proceedings (pp. 295–312). Redwood City, CA: Addison Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Manzo, G. (2010). Analytical sociology and its critics. European Journal of Sociology, 51, 129–170. doi:10.1017/S0003975610000056.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx, K. (1982). Capital: A critique of political economy (Vol. 1). Middlesex: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1956). The holy family or critique of critical critique. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Mäki, U. (2009). Models and truth: The functional decomposition approach. In M. Suarez, M. Dorato, & M. Redei (Eds.), EPSA epistemology and methodology of science: Launch of the European philosophy of science association (pp. 177–187). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Ménard, C., & Shirley, M. M. (2014). The future of new institutional economics: From early intuitions to a new paradigm? Journal of Institutional Economics, 10, 541–565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. (2011). Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39, 7–27. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00394.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E., Walker, J., & Gardner, R. (1992). Covenants with and without a sword: Self-governance is possible. The American Political Science Review, 86, 404–417. doi:10.2307/1964229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelligra, V. (2011). Intentions, trust and frames: A note on sociality and the theory of games. Review of Social Economy, 69, 163–188. doi:10.1080/00346760903568451.
   Google Scholar
• Radzicki, M. J. (1988). Institutional dynamics: An extension of the institutionalist approach to socioeconomic analysis. Journal of Economic Issues, 22, 633–665.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radzicki, M. J. (2003). Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Forrester, and a foundation for evolutionary economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 37, 133–173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radzicki, M. J. (2009). Convergence of the social fabric matrix and complex modeling. In T. Natarajan, W. Elsner, & S. T. Fullwiler (Eds.), Institutional analysis and praxis: The social fabric matrix approach (pp. 69–86). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Radzicki, M. J. (2010). Was Alfred Eichner a system dynamicist? In M. Lavoie, L.-P. Rochon, & M. Seccareccia (Eds.), Money and macrodynamics: Alfred Eichner and post-Keynesian economics (pp. 3–21). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Scholl, H. J. (2001). Agent based and system dynamics modeling: A call for cross study and joint research. Proceedings of the 34th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 3.
   Google Scholar
• Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Inklusiv CD: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Tool, M. R. (2003). The 2003 Veblen-Commons award recipient: F. Gregory Hayden. Journal of Economic Issues, 37, 239–241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varoufakis, Y. (2008). Capitalism according to evolutionary game theory: The impossibility of a sufficiently evolutionary model of historical change. Science & Society, 72, 63–94. doi:10.1521/siso.2007.72.1.63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veblen, T. (2011). The evolution of the scientific point of view. In Charles & G. M. HodgsonCamic (Eds.), Essential writings of Thorstein Vehlen. Originally published in: University of California Chronicle, October 1908 (Vol. vol. 10, pp. 416–491). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vilena, M. C., & Vilena, M. J. (2004). Evolutionary game theory and Thorstein Veblen's evolutionary economics: Is EGT Veblenian? Journal of Economic Issues, 38, 585–610.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Mises, L. (1949). Human action: A treatise on economics. London: William Hodge.
   Google Scholar
• von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior (3rd edn.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilber, C. K., & Harrison, R. S. (March 1978). The methodological basis of institutional economics: Pattern model, storytelling, and holism. Journal of Economic Issues, 12, 61–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar