Talk:Evolutionary economics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Economics WikiProject, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve economics-related articles.. |
| Start | rated as start-Class on the assessment scale |
| Mid | rated as mid-importance on the importance scale |
This is a very abridged and incomplete account of evolutionary economics which only focuses on a very esarly historical stage of its development.Curiously, today many evolutionary economists outside the US even would not include Veblen into the founders of the theory, but would start with Schumpeter and, perhaps, Hayek. For extensive information about modern evolutionary economics, see Esben Andersen's website: http://www.business.auc.dk/evolution/esa/welcome.html The present writer also has launched a related site: www.evolutionaryeconomics.net
Prof.Dr. Carsten Herrmann-Pillath, Germany chepi@uni-wh.de
For editors who might be interested: "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science" Thorstein Veblen, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 12, 1898. --Ben 05:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps there should be a disambiguation page with "Evolutionary Game Theory". I got confused at first, and I should've known better.radek 07:26, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Possible merger in of Kenneth Boulding's Evolutionary Perspective
I have suggested that the above page, which is listed in articles needing wikifying, should be merged with this one. Perhaps it would make this article imbalanced, but that should only be temporary, since it seems that detail about the different economists working within the evolutionary perspective is regularly being added here. Thoughts? Itsmejudith 18:47, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I disagree.
Anyone else got a view? Including on what needs to be done with the KBEP page if not included here? Thanks. Itsmejudith 14:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
The opening of this article strikes me as quite POV in trying to convince the reader that Evolutionary Economics is better than "conventional economics". Maybe it is but this is an encyclopedia. For example: "It stresses complex interdependencies, competition, growth, and resource constraints." - how is this different from conventional economics? Second paragraph - essentially irrelevant, seems to be included just to get in a kick at "conventional economics" "does not take the characteristics of either the objects of choice or of the decision-maker as fixed" - not really true. A typical evolutionary economic model usually poses some kind of a FIXED rule of thumb and then analyzes what kind of rules would "survive". "Newtonian worldview" was challanged in biology? This makes no sense.
I'm very sympathetic to evolutionary economics but there's just some serious misrepresentin' going on here.radek 00:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Agree with radek regarding Newtonian worldview, but should extend to entire paragraph: "Evolutionary economics . . . challenges the Newtonian worldview in economics in the similar manner, as . . . Darwinian evolutionary theory . . . " The referenced Darwin wiki article doesn't even mention Newton. This paragraph definitely needs justification, though I am not able to do so. Imagine&Engage 12:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
