Suchergebnisse

Abstract:This paper analyzes the relation of culture, institutions and economic development using the example of Indonesia. The success of economic catch-up development depends essentially on the interconnection between pre-existing informal constraints on the one hand and novel, imported institutions on the other. Hence culture, understood as the interplay between legal rules and non-legal constraints, has to be considered as an important determinant of economic development and growth. In order to adapt economic policies and thereby prevent institutional traps, which may otherwise hinder economic reforms, it is essential to understand culture and the ways in which different cultural factors support or constrain the functioning of formal institutional settings. Applying a cultural approach to economics in the case of Indonesia's economic development allows for the inclusion of complex cultural conditionality of economic behavior and puts special emphasis on the role of politicians as public and cultural entrepreneurs. Altogether, the example of Indonesia demonstrates once more the necessity to apply a cultural approach to the study of catch-up development in a globalized world.

Das Jahr 1961 markiert einen Wendepunkt in der deutschsprachigen Sozialpolitiklehre: Das Werk "Ökonomische Theorie der Sozialpolitik", das Elisabeth Liefmann-Keil zu diesem Zeitpunkt veröffentlichte, wurde als Ereignis für die wissenschaftliche Sozialpolitik (Zöllner 1962: 215) und als Anschluß an die internationale Diskussion gefeiert (vgl. Lampert 1992: 120). Zwar war bereits bald nach dem Tod Gustav von Schmollers 1917 im Ausklang der historischen Schule ein heftiger Streit um eine "rationale Sozialpolitik" und deren ökonomisch-theoretische Fundierung entbrannt (vgl. Blümle und Goldschmidt 2003a), doch hatten nicht zuletzt die Wirrungen der nationalsozialistischen, "völkischen" Sozialpolitik, eine frühzeitige Rezeption angelsächsischer, neoklassischer Literatur auch für dieses Feld der Wirtschaftswissenschaften in der Nachkriegszeit erschwert.

In the history of economic thought Walter Eucken is mostly known for his impact in establishing the Social Market Economy in post-war Germany. Even though there is a growing interest in his ideas especially from an Austrian and a Constitutional Economics perspective, his influence on the discussions within neoliberalism and, more specifically, his impact in the course of the foundation of the Mont Pèlerin Society (MPS) are not yet widely considered. In this paper we attempt to show that Eucken was very influential in the formation of the MPS and that German ordoliberalism had a significant imprint on the early history of the society. It is primarily Eucken's correspondence with F. A. Hayek and Wilhelm Röpke in this context which we present and analyze, complementing it with some hypotheses about early influences between Eucken and Hayek in terms of methodology and epistemology. Subsequently we show, by regarding the first MPS meetings between 1947 and 1949 (general and organizational), that there was - even at this early stage in the development of the MPS - a widening gap between a Continental European and an Anglo-Saxon understanding of neoliberalism, despite the personal friendships and high collegial respect especially between Eucken, Hayek and Röpke; Ludwig von Mises playing a special role in this setting. We illustrate this development also by discussing personal memories of Leonhard Miksch, a student of Eucken and a participant of the MPS meeting in 1949, recorded in his so far unpublished diary.

"The increasing gap between the formerly socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CE & EE)
with regard to both their economic and political performance cannot be explained by their different starting
conditions after the breakdown of the Soviet Union alone. Rather, it is due to cultural and historical
circumstances that shape the particular tradition and societal environment. Taking a cultural approach and
referring to the newer literature on the transfer of institutions, we try to improve the understanding of the
interrelation between formal and informal institutions. Our central thesis is that the 'reaction rate' of
informal institutions depends on their compatibility with imported formal institutions. The transition
processes in CE & EE can tell us much about the relation between path dependent and politically implemented
institutional change. During the 20th century the countries of CE & EE twice went through rapid
institutional change: For centuries they had acculturated to Western Europe, but as a result of the October
Revolution 'Eastern' patterns were imposed upon them. Since the breakdown of the SU in the late 1980s
they have 'returned to Europe' by (re-)establishing democracy and capitalism. In our opinion, to understand
the differences in performance between the transition countries, it is necessary to interpret both
transitions as processes of institutional transplantation and ask how the informal institutional settings in
the different countries interacted with the imported formal institutions." [author's abstract]