Natural economy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (September 2007)

This article or section contains too many quotations for an encyclopedic entry. Please improve the article or discuss proposed changes on the talk page. You can edit the article to add more encyclopedic text or link the article to a page of quotations, possibly one of the same name, on Wikiquote. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for further suggestions. (March 2008)

Part of a series on Economic systems
Ideologies and theories Anarchist · Capitalism Communist · Corporatism Fascist · Islamic Laissez-faire · Market economy Mercantilism · Socialist
Sectors and systems Closed · Dual · Gift Informal · Mixed · Natural Open · Participatory · Planned Subsistence · Underground Virtual
Related articles Anglo-Saxon economy American School Global economy Hunter-gatherer Information economy Newly industrialized country Palace economy Plantation economy Social market economy Token economy Traditional economy Transition economy
Business and Economics Portal
This box: view • talk • edit

Natural economy refers to a type of economy in which money is not used in the transfer of resources among people. It is a system that instead uses the exchange of goods and services through direct bartering or trade.

Belgian economic historian Henri Pirenne noted that:

"German economists have invented the term Naturalwirtschaft, natural economy, to describe the period prior to the invention of money. (...) The writers who describe this period as one of natural economy obviously do not intend the term to be understood in any absolute sense. They are well aware that ever since its invention, money has been in continuous use among all the civilised people of the West, and that the Roman Empire handed it on without interruption to its succession states. Thus when the early Middle Ages are described as a period of natural economy, all that is meant is that the part played by money was then so small as to be almost negligible. Undoubtedly there is a good deal of truth in this contention; but at the same time we must be on our guard against exaggeration" (Henri Pirenne, Economic and social history of medieval Europe. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1936, p. 103-104).

The term is also used by Karl Marx in his economic writings such as Grundrisse and Capital. Marx comments as follows:

Natural economy, money-economy, and credit-economy have (...) been placed in opposition to one another as being the three characteristic economic forms of movement in social production. In the first place these three forms do not represent equivalent phases of development. The so-called credit-economy is merely a form of the money-economy, since both terms express functions or modes of exchange among the producers themselves. In developed capitalist production, the money-economy appears only as the basis of the credit-economy. The money-economy and credit-economy thus correspond only to different stages in the development of capitalist production, but they are by no means independent forms of exchange vis-à-vis natural economy. With the same justification one might contrapose as equivalents the very different forms of natural economy to those two economies. In the second place, since it is not the economy, i.e., the process of production itself that is emphasised as the distinguishing mark of the two categories, money-economy and credit-economy, but rather the mode of exchange — corresponding to that economy — between the various agents of production, or producers, the same should apply to the first category. Hence exchange economy instead of natural economy. A completely isolated natural economy, such as the Inca state of Peru, would not come under any of these categories. - Capital Vol. 2, chapter 4 [1]