Suchergebnisse

Abstract. The paper starts with arguments against forming causative links between crisis phenomena in theeconomy, both in its real and regulatory sphere, and the crisis of the economic science as such, in terms of itscognitive and predictive values. According to the author, it is also true with respect to the current economicfinancialcrisis.The second part of the paper is an attempt of explaining what should be considered a 'normal' way ofdevelopment of economic science. The author puts and justifies a thesis that this development is a journey ofideas being brought about by numerous causes, with a significant role played by inspirations related not toobservation of the real world but to the 'world of economists' (ideas shared by academic communities) and thephenomena appearing in the external environment of economics as a science: new political and social ideologies,cultural and technological trends, as well as geopolitical changes.In the subsequent part of the paper, starting with the recognition of the so-called logical and historicalfactors in the development of economic science or, following the distinction made by D. Ross (2005), the distinctionof philosophical and historical-sociological strategies in this development, the author tries to prove thatover the last half-century the development of economic science has been heavily influenced by the broadeningacceptance of the criterion of instrumental effectiveness (Laudan–Mongin) in the appraisal of its scientific progress.It is argued in the paper that this has the effect of diminishing the ability of economic science to recognizeand explain some major contemporary civilizational and technological trends (a kind of crisis in terms of thecognitive realism criterion). However, with respect to the emergence of new and cognitively valuable schoolsand currents (e.g., New Institutional Economy), this should not be considered a common feature of today'seconomics. Secondly, the increasing role attributed to the instrumental effectiveness criterion in the evaluationof progress in economic science, has resulted in some crisis phenomena with respect to the predictive strengthof economic models and theories.The paper ends with some more general reflections attempting to identifiy the civilization and technologicaltrends and structural changes in modern economies that are not sufficiently addressed and analyzed in themainstream economics, thus leading to some crisis phenomena (but not a general crisis) in its developmentin terms of the cognitive, predictive, and utilitarian value. With regard to the latter (perceived from the pointof view of various economic policies), the author postulates the need for a more eclectic approach. It is understoodas a postulate to look for the nature, manifestations of and reasons for both growth and crisis processesin contemporary economies, as well as for the instruments of growth state policy, in various (sometimes evencompeting) theories and schools in today's economics.Key words: economic crisis, crisis of economics as a science, criteria of scientific progress in economics, migrationof economic ideas, logical and historical factors in the development of economic science, instrumental andcognitive realism, civilizational and technological trends

The paper starts with a brief discussion of two aspects of convergence hypothesis. The first one (theoretical) refers to standard growth theory, the second is of normative character and pertains to axiological aspects of socio-economic policy, also including the EU cohesion policy. Not aiming to provide any comprehensive evaluation of that policy from the viewpoint of its actual effect on elimination of differences in social and economic development among the European regions, the paper provides selected reflections concentrated on:• an attempt of formulating a viable interpretation of cohesion policy (CP) as a form of 'regulated capitalism'; the attempt in question refers to the normative approach towards public regulation in a market economy but defines the general rationality and fundamental objective of cohesion policy in terms of setting activities directed towards provision of the public goods that stimulate and facilitate exchange of goods and services among regions, thus contributing to the dynamization and endogenization of growth in poor or less developed regions;• the need of growth endogenization as the main objective (and main condition) of effective implementation of cohesion policy, provided that the definition of such endogenization is broader than that employed in the new growth theory. In particular, not rejecting the new growth theory definition of endogenous growth, the author pays special attention to the necessity of maximizing the regional value added through raising the level of processing broadly understood region-specific economic, social and others factors and resources;• correlations between the effects of distribution and growth within the scope of cohesion policy. It is analyzed from the perspective of three important questions: (1) Are the aims of social cohesion and growth competitive, or mutually complementary and reinforcing? (2) Why the hypothesis of regional convergence fails to explain the EU perspective, despite two decades of ongoing efforts of implementing active cohesion policy and regional policy? (3) Whether, and to what degree, the elimination of differences in the level of regional development is a legitimate strategy in the light of the controversy 'equality vs. effectiveness'.

The global problem of unsustainable development connected with declining levels of natural resources began to be noticed at the turn of the sixties and seventies. Public opinion became concerned with ecological imblances thanks to e.g. Bernhard Grzimek's film the Serengeti Shall Not Die and Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring. The academic and politicalenvironmental environments were greatly affected at this time by the publication of two reports devoted to global development: a report by the UN Secretary-General - U Thant and the famous first Report of the RomeGroup, the Limits of Growth in 1972 [Meadows et al., 1972]. The reactio that these reports madę, in conjuction with the mid 1970s oil crisis thatsome had forecast, caused major political changes and madę governments of industrialised States realise how dependent they were on a constant supply of raw materials and energy.