Pushkinskaya st. 43. office 10
Rostov-on-Don, Russia
344082
e-mail: info@hjournal.ru 
tel. +7(863) 269-88-14

cubsEN (2)

Typologization of approaches to identifying the efficiency of economic institutions

Typologization of approaches to identifying the efficiency of economic institutions

Journal of Institutional studies, , Vol. 6 (no. 2),
p. 91-109

The purpose of the paper is to set up a typology of conceptions of economic efficiency. The criticism of the use of concepts of efficiency in economic research is considered. These conceptions of economic efficiency are described: Pareto efficiency, conceptions of «public purpose», Kaldor-Hicks efficiency criterion, Scitovsky double criterion, conceptions of social welfare functions, theory of second best, conception of economic growth as an indicator of the efficiency, transaction costs, conceptions of natural indicators of the efficiency, conception of X-efficiency, conception of group selection, conceptions of happiness indicators, conceptions of synthetic indicators of efficiency in human development, Douglass North’s conception of adaptive efficiency, Israel Kirzner’s theory of efficiency, Roy Cordato’s conception of catalectic efficiency, Jesus Huerta de Soto’s theory of dynamic efficiency. The specificity of sociobiological approach to the study of the efficiency of institutions is shown. The author attempts to test of applicability of described conceptions for the analysis of efficiency of economic institutions.


Keywords: economic efficiency; efficiency of institutions; interests; social welfare; ethical principles

References:
  • Brodie R. (2007). Virus of the mind: The New Science of the Meme. Moscow, Generation [Pokoleniye] Publ. (In Russian).
  • Volchik V. V. and Kot V. V. (2013). Institutional change in the peripheral regions: The role of the civil institutions. TERRA ECONOMICUS, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 12-35. (In Russian).
  • Volchik V. V. and Shiryaev I. М. (2012). Economic growth and trends in the socioeconomic development of Cambodia. TERRA ECONOMICUS, vol. 10, no. 1.2, pp. 154159. (In Russian).
  • Galbraith J. K. (1976). Economics and the public purpose. Moscow, Progress Publ. (In Russian).
  • United Nations Millennium Declaration. (http://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/declarations/summitdecl.shtml - Access Date: 11.03.2014). (In Russian).
  • Dawkins R. (2013). The Selfish Gene. Moscow, AST, Corpus Publ. (In Russian).
  • David P. (2006a). Path dependence and historical social science: an Introductory Lecture. Origins: from the experience of research of economics as structure also as process. Moscow, Publ. House of HSE, pp. 183-207. (In Russian).
  • David P. (2006b). Clio and the Economics of QWERTY. Origins: from the experience of research of economics as structure also as process. Moscow, Publ. House of HSE, pp. 139-150. (In Russian).
  • Kravchenko E. N. (2013). Problem of measuring socio-economic efficiency of human potential development at regional level. Bulletin of Irkutsk State Technical University, no. 3 (74), pp. 141-146. (In Russian).
  • Leibenstein H. (1999). Allocative Efficiency vs. X-Efficiency. Milestones of economic thought. Vol. 2. Theory of the firm. St. Petersburg, Economic School [Ekonomicheskaya shkola] Publ., pp. 432-447. (In Russian).
  • Lipsey R. G. and Lancaster K. J. (2004). The General Theory of Second Best. Milestones of economic thought. Vol. 4. Welfare economics and public choice. St. Petersburg, Economic School [Ekonomicheskaya shkola] Publ., pp. 95-134. (In Russian).
  • Lokalov A. A. (2012). Flexibility and adaptability of new institutions as determinants of their effectiveness. Bulletin of the Saratov State Socio-Economic University, no. 5, pp. 46-50. (In Russian).
  • North D. (1997). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Moscow, Economic Book Foundation «Beginnings» [«Nachala»]. (In Russian).
  • North D. (2010). Understanding the process of economic change. Moscow, Publ. House of HSE. (In Russian).
  • Nureev R. M. (2010). Russia after crisis - gauge effect. Journal of Institutional Studies, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 7-26. (In Russian).
  • Nureev R. M. (2011). Feudal society as the supreme and final stage of the traditional economy. Christian type of culture. TERRA ECONOMICUS, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 95-140. (In Russian).
  • Rudyakov V. A. (2009). Possible ways of adaptive efficiency evaluation of a firm. Proceedings of Irkutsk State Economics Academy, no. 1 (63), pp. 15-18. (In Russian).
  • Sachs J. D. (2011). The end of poverty: Economic possibilities for our time. Moscow, The Gaidar Institute’s Publ. House. (In Russian).
  • Sukharev O. S. (2010). The theory of economy efficiency: organizational, institutional and systems view of the problem. Journal of Economy and entrepreneurship, no. 6, pp. 5-17. (In Russian).
  • Sukharev O. S. (2013). Economic theory of efficiency: the existing problems and development opportunities. Herald of South Russian State Technical University (Novocherkassk Polytechnic Institute), no, 3, pp. 5-30. (In Russian).
  • Huerta de Soto J. (2011). The Theory of Dynamic Efficiency. Chelyabinsk, Socium Publ. (In Russian).
  • Hayek F. A. (2006). Law, legislation and liberty: A New Statement of the Liberal Principles of Justice and Political Economy. Мoscow, IRISEN. (In Russian).
  • Hicks J. R. (2004). The Foundations of Welfare Economics. Milestones of economic thought. Vol. 4. Welfare economics and public choice. St. Petersburg, Economic School [Ekonomicheskaya shkola] Publ., pp. 17-38. (In Russian).
  • United Nations Millennium Development Goals. (http://www.un.org/ru/millenniumgoals/ - Access Date: 21.03.2014). (In Russian).
  • Shiryaev I. M. (2012). Economic dynamics and efficiency of institutions in Cambodia. Proceedings of the Postgraduate Students and Competitors of Southern Federal University. Vol. XVII. Rostov-on-Don, SFedU Publ., pp. 385-389. (In Russian).
  • Shiryaev I. M. (2013). Principles and problems of Friedrich August von Hayek’s evolutionary approach. ТЕRRА ECONOMICUS, vol. 11, no. 1.3, pp. 9-13. (In Russian).
  • Arrow K. J. (1993). The potentials and limits of the market in resource allocation. THESIS, issue 2, pp. 53-68. (In Russian).
  • Andreozzi L. (2005). Hayek reads the literature on the emergence of norms. Constitutional Political Economy, vol. 16, issue 3, pp. 227-247.
  • Better Life Index 2013: Definitions and Metadata. (http://www.oecd.org/statistics/OECD-Better-Life-Index-2013-definitions.pdf - Access Date: 01.04.2014).
  • Blackmore S. (2000). The meme machine. New York, Oxford University Press Inc.
  • Cordato R. (2007). Efficiency and externalities in an open-ended universe: A Modern Austrian Perspective. Auburn, Alabama, The Ludwig von Mises Institute.
  • De Scitovszky T. (1941). A note on welfare propositions in economics. The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 77-88.
  • Distin K. (2005). The selfish meme: A Critical Reassessment. Cambridge, New York, Cambridge University Press.
  • Helliwell J. F., Layard R. and Sachs J. D. (2013). World happiness report 2013. New York, UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
  • Kaldor N. (1939). Welfare propositions of economics and interpersonal comparisons of utility. The Economic Journal, vol. 49, no. 195, pp. 549-552.
  • Kirzner I. (1963). Market theory and the price system. Princeton, New York, Van Nostrand.
  • Kirzner I. (1997). How markets work: Disequilibrium, Entrepreneurship and Discovery. London, Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
  • Maskin E. S. (2008). Mechanism design: How to implement social goals. American Economic Review, vol. 98, issue 3, pp. 567-576.
  • Mukhopadhaya P. (2001). Efficiency criteria and the Sen-type social welfare function. The Indian Economic Journal, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 106-113.
  • OECD (2013). OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-being. Paris, OECD Publishing.
  • Potts J. (2007). X-efficiency vs. X-efficacy. Renaissance in Behavioral Economics: Essays in honour of Harvey Leibenstein / R. Frantz (ed). London, Routledge. pp. 92-104.
  • Rotbard M. (1979). The myth of efficiency. Time, Uncertainty, and Disequilibrium / M. Rizzo (ed.). Lexington, Massachusetts, D.C. Heath, pp. 90-95.
  • Royal Government of Bhutan. The Report of the High-Level Meeting on Wellbeing and Happiness: Defining a New Economic Paradigm. New York, The Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of Bhutan to the United Nations. Thimphu, Office of the Prime Minister, 2012.
  • Stigler G. J. (1976). The Xistence of X-Efficiency. The American Economic Review, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 213-216.
  • Stringham E. (2001). Kaldor-Hicks efficiency and the problem of central planning. The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 41-50.
  • Sukharev O. S. (2012). Institutes of social development and their efficiency estimation. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, vol. 8, no. 2 special, pp. 125-150.
  • Table 3: Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index. (https://data.undp.org/dataset/Table-3-Inequality-adjusted-Human-Development-Inde/9jnv-7hyp - Access Date: 21.03.2014).
  • Wallis J. J. and North D. C. (1986). Measuring the transaction sector in the American economy, 1870-1970. Long-Term factors in American Economic Growth / S. L. Engerman and R. E. Gallman (eds.). Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
  • Wang N. (2003). Measuring transaction costs: An incomplete survey. Ronald Coase Institute Working Papers, no. 2. (http://coase.org/w-wang2003measuringtransactioncosts.pdf - Access Date: 25.02.2014).
  • Wrobel R. M. (2006). Grundlagen einer evolutorischen Theorie der institutionellen Entwicklung. Majandusarengu institutsionaalsed tegurid, vol. 26, pp. 75-101. (http://infutik.mtk.ut.ee/www/kodu/RePEc/mtk/febpdf/febook26-02.pdf - Access Date: 27.02.2014).
Publisher: Ltd. "Humanitarian perspectives"
Founder: Southern Federal University
ISSN: 2076-6297