“What is so Austrian about Austrian Economics?”
By
David Colander
August, 2009
MIDDLEBURY COLLEGE ECONOMICS DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 09-10
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
MIDDLEBURY COLLEGE
MIDDLEBURY, VERMONT 05753
http://www.middlebury.edu/~econ
The Domain of Austrian Economics
David Colander, Middlebury College
Keynote Address Prepared for
Wirth Institute for Austrian and Central European Studies’ Biennial Workshop
Conference on the Austrian School of Economics
“What is so Austrian about Austrian Economics?”
17 October 2008
Revised 20 March 2009
David Colander
CAJ Distinguished Professor of Economics
Department of Economics
Middlebury College
Middlebury, Vermont, 05753
Colander@Middlebury.edu
Abstract:
Modern mainstream economics is a plurocracy in which there is no orthodoxy of ideas,
only an orthodoxy of method. Given the training it provides its students, mainstream
economic’s natural domain is science. With the mainstream’s acceptance of complexity
views of the economy, Austrian economist’s views can now get a hearing within the
mainstream. Thus, within the science of economics, there is no need for a separate
Austrian economics. However, there is a need for Austrian economics in political
economy, that branch of economics that takes the insights of science and relates them to
policy. The paper urges Austrian economics to embrace political economy as its domain,
and to position its work as within political economy.

“What is so Austrian about Austrian Economics?” David Colander August, 2009 Keynote Address Prepared for Wirth Institute for Austrian and Central European Studies’ Biennial Workshop Conference on the Austrian School of Economics “What is so Austrian about Austrian Economics?” Abstract: Modern mainstream economics is a plurocracy in which there is no orthodoxy of ideas, only an orthodoxy of method. Given the training it provides its students, mainstream economic’s natural domain is science. With the mainstream’s acceptance of complexity views of the economy, Austrian economist’s views can now get a hearing within the mainstream. Thus, within the science of economics, there is no need for a separate Austrian economics. However, there is a need for Austrian economics in political economy, that branch of economics that takes the insights of science and relates them to policy. The paper urges Austrian economics to embrace political economy as its domain, and to position its work as within political economy.

Boa pergunta do prof. Colander. Para ler o artigo, clique aqui. Talvez um ponto útil seja:

As we argued in Colander, Holt and Rosser (2004) the economics profession is best thought of as a complex emerging system that cannot usefully be characterized by static names and concepts. You can use classifiers, but as soon as people start thinking that the classifier defines them, it become counterproductive.

Cuidado para não confundir os argumentos do autor. Que tal esta outra:

Today, the problem facing all heterodox groups, Austrians included, is that much of what they were fighting against no longer exists, if it ever did exist. Any orthodoxy that may have existed back in the 1970s has been replaced by a mainstream plurocracy.

Interessante, não? Leia o texto todo para se divertir com uma visão bem mais interessante dos grupos heterodoxos do que os auto-celebrados membros da heterodoxia (note a breve economia política que o autor faz sobre os interesses que permeiam a criação de sub-grupos heterodoxos…).

Sim, há gente séria fazendo ciência. Que tal este excelente trecho:

I’m pleased that that group has been successful, and through the efforts of economists such a Peter Boettke and Roger Koppl, Austrian economics has played an important role in maintaining a heterodox presence in the US, and has kept them from being seen as just pro-market ideologs.

Obviamente, a sugestão de Colander pode não agradar a alguns – a divisão entre “economia política”  e “ciência econômica”, mas qualquer austríaco sério deveria refletir sobre o texto.