Análise metodológica da economia institucional

• Ano de defesa: 2008
• Autor(a) principal: Cavalcante, Carolina Miranda
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Programa de Pós-graduação em Economia; Economia
• Palavras-chave em Português: Economia institucional; Institucionalismo; Metodologia e instituição; Veblen, Thorstein, 1857-1929; Nova economia institucional; Velha economia institucional; Metodologia econômica; CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::ECONOMIA
• Link de acesso: https://app.uff.br/riuff/handle/1/17676

This work aims to discuss the possibility of collaboration between two branches of the institutionalist thought, represented by the new institutional economics (NIE) by Douglass North and the old institutional economics (OIE) by Thorstein Veblen. It is possible to assign the conceptual framework by Geoffrey Hodgson and Ha-Joon Chang as a continuation of the veblenian ideas. Thus, the discussion proposed is based on three facts observed in the literature concerned with institutional economics: (i) there is no unique definition of institutions among the authors from the OIE or from the NIE; (ii) it is not consensual that there is a theoretical convergence between the OIE and the NIE approaches; (iii) different conceptions of institutions produce distinct policy conclusions for economic development, at least in the case of North and Chang. These observed facts are considered in light of the discussions that take place in philosophy of science, which are reflected in the methodological debates in economics. Within these methodological debates the critical realism advocated by Tony Lawson is opposed to the instrumentalism by Milton Friedman. It is argued that the difference between the OIE and the NIE is ontological, that is, North and Veblen vindicates theories based in distinct worldviews, and this can be identified through the observation of the nature of the critique of those authors to the neoclassical tradition