阅读约瑟夫·熊彼特 Joseph Schumpeter在百家争鸣的作品!!! | |||
约瑟夫·熊彼特1883年，熊彼特出生于奥匈帝国摩拉维亚省（今捷克境内，故有人又把熊彼特看作美籍捷克人）特利希镇的一个织布厂主的家庭。他幼年就学于维也纳的一个贵族中学；
1901－1906年肄业于维也纳大学，攻读法律和经济，乃奥地利学派主要代表人物庞巴维克的及门弟子。当时他的同学好友中有后来成为奥地利社会民主党领导人物的奥托·鲍威尔，以及后来成为德国社会民主党人、第二国际首领之一的希法亭。迨后他游学伦敦，就教于马歇尔；终生他高度推崇洛桑学派的瓦尔拉斯。第一次世界大战前后，熊彼特曾执教于奥国的几个大学。
约瑟夫·熊彼特哈佛大学
1918年，他曾一度出任考茨基、希法亭等人领导的德国社会民主党“社会化委员会”的顾问；
1919年，他又短期出任由奥托·鲍威尔等人为首的奥地利社会民主党参加组成的奥国混合内阁的财政部长。
1921年，他弃仕从商，任私营比德曼银行行长，1924年银行破产，他的私人积蓄不得不受牵连而用于偿债。
1925年，熊彼特又回到学术界，先应邀拟赴日本任大学客座教授，但不久改赴德国任波恩大学教授，直到1931年又短期访日讲学。
1932年迁居美国，任哈佛大学经济学教授，直到1950年初逝世。熊彼特迁美后，尽管深居简出，但仍积极从事学术活动；
1937——1941年任“经济计量学会”会长；
1948－1949年任“美国经济学会”会长；如果不是过早去世，他还会担任预先商定的即将成立的“国际经济学会”第一届会长。
约瑟夫·熊彼特 - 学说主张
“景气循环” - 也称“商业周期”(Business cycle)这是熊彼特最常为后人引用的经济学主张。根据其说法，类似“景气循环”的主张早在19世纪的1830年代就被英国经济学家图克(Thomas Tooke)采用其时代的经济学术语提出过了，后来在重要的经济学家著作中也都约略地提到过这个概念，比如在李嘉图、马歇尔、庞巴维克跟马克思....等人的著作中。熊彼特认为自己只不过是将景气循环的定义与作用给明确地展示出来之人而已。
约瑟夫·熊彼特熊皮特经济危机理论
“创新”(Innovation) - 将原始生产要素重新排列组合为新的生产方式，以求提高效率、降低成本的一个经济过程。在熊彼特经济模型中，能够成功“创新”的人便能够摆脱利润递减的困境而生存下来，那些不能够成功地重新组合生产要素之人会最先被市场淘汰。
“资本主义的创造性破坏”(The creative destruction of capitalism) - 当景气循环到谷底的同时，也是某些企业家不得不考虑退出市场或是另一些企业家必须要“创新”以求生存的时候。只要将多余的竞争者筛除或是有一些成功的“创新”产生，便会使景气提升、生产效率提高，但是当某一产业又重新是有利可图的时候，它又会吸引新的竞争者投入，然后又是一次利润递减的过程，回到之前的状态....。所以说每一次的萧条都包括著一次技术革新的可能，这句话也可以反过来陈述为：技术革新的结果便是可预期的下一次萧条。在熊彼特看来，资本主义的创造性与毁灭性因此是同源的。但熊彼特并不认为资本主义的优越性便是由于其自己产生的动力将而不停地推动自身发展，他相信资本主义经济最终将因为无法承受其快速膨胀带来的能量而崩溃于其自身的规模。
“菁英民主理论”- 或称为“菁英竞争式民主理论”。在其代表作《资本主义、社会主义与民主》一书中，熊彼特采用他那德国历史学派的老成语调提出了他对于民主理论的观察。他主张：西方两百年间主要的民主理论皆建立在不真实的前题之上，比如说这些民主理论不经考察投票人是否具有对投票内容的专业认识便以为多数的意见优于少数的意见。他认为这样的民主学说仅仅是空想，与事实完全脱结，更没有真实地阐述政府权力的来源。熊彼特认为他的看法才是符合人类历史经验的：民主仅是产生治理者的一个过程，而且还不是一个必要过程，无论人民参与民主的程度有多少，政治权力始终都是在菁英阶层当中转让。与其主张资本主义即将崩塌时一样，这两个主张都被认为是历史主义者的悲观论点。无论如何，熊彼特的“菁英竞争式民主理论”引起了政治学者的观注，其中以反驳者居多，另外有人将熊彼特的学说与意大利社会学家巴烈图的“菁英循环”说并列为菁英政治学说的两大经典。
约瑟夫·熊彼特 - 创新理论
一、企业家的本质是创新
约瑟夫·熊彼特技术创新
熊彼特认为，创新就是建立一种新的生产函数，也就是说，把一种从来没有过的关于生产要素和生产条件的“新组合”引人生产体系。这种新组合包括5种情况：(1)采用一种新产品或一种产品的新特征；(2)采用一种新的生产方法；(3)开辟一个新市场；(4)掠取或控制原材料或半制成品的一种新的供应来源；(5)实现任何一种工业的新的组织。因此“创新”不是一个技术概念，而是一个经济概念：它严格区别于技术发明，而是把现成的技术革新引入经济组织，形成新的经济能力。
熊彼特把新组合的实现称为企业，把以实现新组合为基本职能的人们称为企业家。按着他的定义，企业家比人们原来所指的企业家在内涵和外延上既要窄又要宽。“广一些，是因为首要地，人们所叫做的企业家，不仅包括在交换经济中通常所称的‘独立的’生意人，而且也包括所有的实际上完成人们用来给这个概念下定义的那种职能的人，尽管他们是（现在逐渐变成通例）一家公司的‘依附的’雇佣人员，例如经理、董事会成员等等：或者尽管他们完成企业家的职能的实际权力具有其它的基础，例如控制大部分的股权。由于是实现新组合才构成一个企业家，所以他不一定要同某个别厂商有永久的联系：许多的‘金融家’、 ‘发起人’等等就不是同某些具体厂商有永久的联系，但他们仍然可以是人们所说的企业家。另一方面，人们的概念比传统的概念要狭一些，它并不包括各个厂商的所有的头目们或经理们或工业家们，他们只是经营已经建立起来的企业，而只是包括实际履行那种职能的人们。”人们原来认为的企业家，并不是熊彼特意义上的企业家，而原来不被当作企业家的，则属于熊彼特意义上的企业家。一个人只有当他实际上实现“新组合”时才是一个企业家。
熊彼特还认为，充当一个企业家并不是一种职业，一般说也不是一种持久的状况，所以企业家并不形成一个专门意义上讲的阶级。他说：“一旦当他建立起他的企业以后，也就是当他安定下来经营这个企业，就像其他的人经营他们的企业一样的时候，他就失去了这种资格。”因此，一个人在其一身中很少能总是一个企业家，且企业家的职能本身是不能继承的。
二、企业家是推动经济发展的主体
熊彼特认为，在没有创新的情况下，经济只能处于一种他所称谓的“循环流转”的均衡状态，经济增长只是数量的变化，这种数量关系无论如何积累，本身并不能创造出具有质的飞跃的“经济发展”。“在例行事物的边界以外，每行一步都有困难，都包含一个新的要素。正是这个要素。构成领导这一现象。”这里的领导，就是率先创新的企业家。只有企业家实现创新，“创造性的破坏”经济循环的惯行轨道，推动经济结构从内部进行革命性的破坏，才有经济发展。
熊彼特还认为，创新引起模仿，模仿打破垄断，刺激了大规模的投资，引起经济繁荣，当创新扩展到相当多的企业之后，盈利机会趋于消失，经济开始衰退，期待新的创新行为出现。整个经济体系将在繁荣、衰退、萧条和复苏四个阶段构成的周期性运动过程中前进。他首先用“纯模式”来解释经济周期的两个主要阶段 ——繁荣和衰退——的交替：创新—(为创新者)带来超额利润—引起其他企业仿效—第一次创新浪潮—对银行信用和资本品的需求—经济步入繁荣；创新的普及—超额利润消失—对银行信用和资本品的需求—经济收缩，由繁荣步入衰退。
对经济周期的四阶段：繁荣、衰退、萧条、复苏，熊彼特用创新引起的“第二次浪潮”来解释之。第一创新浪潮—对银行信用和资本品的需求↑—生产资本品的部门扩张—生产消费品的部门扩张—第二次浪潮—物价，投资机会↑，投机现象出现。随着创新的普及，超额利润消失，经济进入衰退期。第二次浪潮与第一次浪潮有重大的差别。第二次浪潮中许多投资机会与本部门的创新无关。这样，第二次浪潮中不仅包含了纯模式不存在的失误和过度投资行为，而且它不具有自行调整走向新均衡的能力。因此，在纯模式中，新的创新引起经济自动地从衰退走向繁荣，而现在由于第二次浪潮作用，经济从衰退走向萧条。萧条发生后，第二次浪潮的反应逐渐消除，经济转向复苏。要使经济从复苏进入繁荣，则必须再次出现创新。
熊彼特用三对相应的矛盾作为特征来描述了“循环流转”过程与“发展”过程的区别，第一，两个真实过程的对立：一方面，有循环流转或走向均衡的趋势，另一方面有例行经济事物渠道中的变化，或以制度内部产生的经济数据中的自发的变化；第二，两个理论工具的对立：静态的和动态的，第三，两类行动的对立：根据现实，人们可以将其描绘为两种类型的人物，单纯的经理和企业家。
三、创新的主动力来自于企业家精神
熊彼特认为，对企业家从事“创新性的破坏”工作的动机，固然是以挖掘潜在利润为直接目的，但不一定出自个人发财致富的欲望。他指出，企业家与只想赚钱的普通商人或投机者不同，个人致富充其量仅是他部分目的，而最突出的动机来于“个人实现”的心理，即“企业家精神”。熊彼特认为“企业家精神”包括：
1、建立私人王国。企业家经常“存在有一种梦想和意志，要去找到一个私人王国，常常也是一个王潮。”对于没有其他机会获得社会名望的人来说，它的引诱力是特别强烈的。
2、对胜利的热情。企业家“存在有征服的意志；战斗的冲动，证明自己比别人优越的冲动，他求得成功不仅是为了成功的果实，而是为了成功本身。”利润和金钱是次要的考虑，而是“作为成功的指标和胜利的象征才受到视”。
3、创造的喜悦。企业家“存在有创造的欢乐，把事情做成的欢乐，或者只是施展个人能力和智谋的欢乐。这类似于一个无所不在的动机⋯⋯人们类型的人寻找困难，为改革而改革，以冒险为乐事。”企业家是典型的反享乐主义者。
4、坚强的意志。企业家“在自己熟悉的循环流转中是顺着潮流游泳，如果他想要改变这种循环流转的渠道，他就是逆潮流游泳。从前的助力现在变成了阻力，过去熟悉的数据，现在变成了未知数。”“需要有新的和另一种意志上的努力，⋯⋯去为设想和拟订出新的组合而搏斗，并设法使自己把它看作是一种真正的可能性，而不只是一场白日梦。”
四、成功的创新取决于企业家的素质
约瑟夫·熊彼特熊皮特理论
熊彼特认为企业家的工作是“创造性的破坏”。而阻碍创新的因素有：第一，是信息不充分条件下许多事情处于不可知的状态。“实现一个新计划，和根据一个习惯的计划去行动，是两件不同的事情，就像建造一条公路和沿着公里行走是两件不同的事情一样。”第二，是人的惰性。“作为一种新的事情，不仅在客观上比作已经熟悉的和已经由经验检定的事情更加困难，而且个人会感到不愿意去做它，即使客观上的困难并不存在，也还是感到不愿意。”第三，是社会环境的反作用。这种反作用首先在法律上或政治上存在障碍而表现出来，其次在受到创新威胁的各个集团中表现出来，再次在于难于找到必要的合作上表现出来，最后是在难以赢得消费者上表现出来。
熊彼特认为企业家要进行创新首先要进行观念更新。这是因为“一切知识和习惯一旦获得以后，就牢固地植根于人们之中，就像一条铁路的路堤植根于地面上一样。它不要求被继续不断地更新和自觉地再度生产，而是深深沉落在下意识的底层中。它通常通过遗传，教育，培养和环境压力，几乎是没有摩擦地传递下去。”
其次，企业家必须具备一定的能力。这些能力包括：1、预测能力。企业家应具有“尽管在当时不能肯定而以后则证明为正确的方式去观察事情的能力，以及尽管不能说明这样做所根据的原则，而却能掌握主要的事实、抛弃非主要的事实的能力，”能抓住眼前机会，挖掘市场中存在的潜在利润。2、组织能力。企业家 “不仅在于找到或创造新的事物，而在于用它去是社会集团留下深刻的印象，从而带动社会集团跟在它后面走。”善于动员和组织社会资源进行并实现生产要素新组合。3、说服能力。企业家善于说服人们，使他们相信执行他的计划的可能性；注重取得信任，以说服银行家提供资本，实现生产方式新组合。
当然，在熊彼特看来，企业家是不承担风险的。这是因为企业家进行创新活动所需要的资本是由那些成功的企业家所形成的资本家阶层提供的，即资本市场提供的。企业家可以从资本市场获取他们需要的任意数量的资本，因而资本并不构成其成为企业家的约束条件。与此相对应，由于资本的外来性，风险也由资本所有者承担，企业家并不承担风险。
五、信用制度是企业家实现创新的经济条件
由于创新来自于体系内部，新组合的实现，就意味着对经济体系中现有生产手段的供应作不同的使用。支配生产手段对于执行新组合是必要的。银行家通过提供信用，向企业家贷款，正好就把资源放在企业家手中供其运用，这就是银行家所起的杠杆和桥梁作用。而提供信贷的人便是“资本家”那一类人的职能。在熊彼特看来，所谓资本，就是企业家为了实现“新组合”，用以“把生产指往新方向”、“把各项生产要素和资源引向新用途”的一种杠杆和控制手段。资本不是具体商品的总和，而是可供企业家随时提用的支付手段，是企业家和商品世界的“桥梁”，其职能在于为企业家进行创新而提供必要的条件。由此可见，熊彼特所谓的信用，指的就是企业家能够按照自己的意志随时使用的支付手段。换句话说，信用就是专为以实现创新为目的的企业家而创设的货币资本。信用使得个人能够在某种程度上不依靠继承的财产而独立行事。因此，信用对于新的组合是首要的。而这只有在资本主义社会才具有。熊彼特进一步分析指出，当资本主义经济进入相对发达阶段之后，资本市场的建立和良好运转成为实现创新的基础。
约瑟夫·熊彼特 - 身后影响
被誉为“现代企业管理学之父”的彼得·德鲁克(Peter Drucker)一向承认其深受熊彼特的影响。
约瑟夫·熊彼特熊皮特影响
他与熊彼特同样强调企业家在“繁荣”这个目的上所扮演的角色比资本家更为关键，并且改良了熊彼特对于菁英的看法，更多于强调菁英份子的社会责任。另外他也同意“创新”便是生产要素的重新排列，且更深入的剖析了创新的价值。此外在他对于“泡沫经济”的观察中也可看出很明显的熊彼特学说影响。
1931年熊彼特访问日本并做了三场对经济系学生的演说，此行后对日本文明留下非常美好的印象。这三场演说后来证实为熊彼特在日本青年经济学者心中留下了极深刻的印象，有几位当时坐在台下的学生后来成为熊彼特学说在日本的宣传人。回到美国后的熊彼特也对于哈佛大学经济学系中几位来自日本的留学生特别关爱。其终生都很欣赏日本文化。就是因为其对日本文化的友善态度并这几位学生毕生对老师的推崇，使得熊彼特在日本的知名度高过其在亚洲其他国家。这几位熊彼特在日本的推崇者是中山伊知郎(波昂大学时期学生)、东畑精一 (同前)、都留重人(哈佛大学时期学生)、高田保马(听讲时已是经济学者)。这些人又影响了后一代的经济学家如塩野谷祐一与根井雅弘，其中塩野谷祐一是目前日本公认的熊彼特研究权威。
约瑟夫·熊彼特 - 著作书目
《经济发展理论》1911年发表德文版 1912年英文版问市
《经济发展理论》第二版，1926年。有做大幅修改，加上副标“企业者的利润、资本、信贷、利息及景气循环”
《景气循环论》1939年出版
《资本主义、社会主义与民主》1942年出版
《经济分析史》1954年纽约出版。熊彼特死后由遗孀整理发表。
Life
Born in Třešť, Moravia (now Czech Republic, then part of Austria-Hungary) in 1883 to Catholic ethnic German parents, Schumpeter began his career studying law at the University of Vienna under the Austrian capital theorist Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, taking his PhD in 1906. In 1909, after some study trips, he became a professor of economics and government at the University of Czernowitz. In 1911 he joined the University of Graz, where he remained until World War I. In 1919-1920, he served as the Austrian Minister of Finance, with some success, and in 1920-1924, as president of the private Biedermann Bank. That bank, along with a great part of that regional economy, collapsed in 1924 leaving Schumpeter bankrupt.
From 1925-1932, he held a chair at the University of Bonn, Germany. He lectured at Harvard in 1927-1928 and 1930. Because of the rise of Nazism in Germany he moved to the United States where he would teach from 1932 until his death in 1950.
During his Harvard years he was not generally considered a good classroom teacher, but he acquired a school of loyal followers. His prestige among colleagues was likewise not very high because his views seemed outdated and not in synch with the then-fashionable Keynesianism. This period of his life was characterized by hard work but little recognition of his core ideas.
Although Schumpeter encouraged some young mathematical economists and was even the president of the Econometric Society (1940–41), Schumpeter was not a mathematician but rather an economist and tried instead to integrate sociological understanding into his economic theories. From current thought it has been argued that Schumpeter's ideas on business cycles and economic development could not be captured in the mathematics of his day - they need the language of non-linear dynamical systems to be partially formalized.
Schumpeter claimed that he had set himself three goals in life: to be the greatest economist in the world, to be the best horseman in all of Austria and the greatest lover in all of Vienna. He said he had reached two of his goals, but he never said which two. Although, he is reported to have said that there were too many fine horseman in Austria for him to succeed in all his aspirations! (P.A. Samuelson and W.D. Nordhaus, Economics (1998, p. 178)
Most important work
This article may be confusing or unclear to readers. Please help clarify the article; suggestions may be found on the talk page. (March 2009)
Evolutionary economic
Main article: Evolutionary economic
History of Economic Analysi
Schumpeter's scholarship is apparent in his posthumous History of Economic Analysis, although some of his judgments seem idiosyncratic and sometimes cavalier. For instance, Schumpeter thought that the greatest 18th century economist was Turgot, not Adam Smith, as many consider, and he considered Léon Walras to be the "greatest of all economists", beside whom other economists' theories were "like inadequate attempts to catch some particular aspects of Walrasian truth". Schumpeter criticized John Maynard Keynes and David Ricardo for the "Ricardian vice." According to Schumpeter, Ricardo and Keynes reasoned in terms of abstract models, where they would freeze all but a few variables. Then they could argue that one caused the other in a simple monotonic fashion. This led to the belief that one could easily deduce policy conclusions directly from a highly abstract theoretical model.
Business cycle
Schumpeter's relationships with the ideas of other economists were quite complex in his most important contributions to economic analysis - the theory of business cycles and development. Following neither Walras nor Keynes, Schumpeter starts in The Theory of Economic Development with a treatise of circular flow which, excluding any innovations and innovative activities, leads to a stationary state. The stationary state is, according to Schumpeter, described by Walrasian equilibrium. The hero of his story, though, is, in fine Austrian fashion, the entrepreneur.
Economic Waves serie
(see Business cycles)
Cycle/Wave Name Year
Kitchin inventory 3–5
Juglar fixed investment 7–11
Kuznets infrastructural investment 15–25
Kondratiev wave 45–60
The entrepreneur disturbs this equilibrium and is the prime cause of economic development, which proceeds in cyclic fashion along several time scales. In fashioning this theory connecting innovations, cycles, and development, Schumpeter kept alive the Russian Nikolai Kondratiev's ideas on 50-year cycles, Kondratiev waves.
Schumpeter suggested a model in which the four main cycles, Kondratiev (54 years), Kuznets (18 years), Juglar (9 years) and Kitchin (about 4 years) can be added together to form a composite waveform. (Actually there was considerable professional rivalry between Schumpeter and Kuznets. The wave form suggested here did not include the Kuznets Cycle simply because Schumpeter did not recognize it as a valid cycle[clarification needed]. See "Business Cycle" for further information.) A Kondratiev wave could consist of three lower degree Kuznets waves. Each Kuznets wave could, itself, be made up of two Juglar waves. Similarly two (or three) Kitchin waves could form a higher degree Juglar wave. If each of these were in phase, more importantly if the downward arc of each was simultaneous so that the nadir of each was coincident it would explain disastrous slumps and consequent depressions. (As far as the segmentation of the Kondratiev Wave, Schumpeter never proposed such a fixed model. He saw these cycles varying in time - although in a tight time frame by coincidence - and for each to serve a specific purpose)
Schumpeter and Keynesianism
Unlike Keynes, in Schumpeter's theory, Walrasian equilibrium is not adequate to capture the key mechanisms of economic development. Schumpeter also thought that the institution enabling the entrepreneur to purchase the resources needed to realize his or her vision was a well-developed capitalist financial system, including a whole range of institutions for granting credit. One could divide economists among (1) those who emphasized "real" analysis and regarded money as merely a "veil" and (2) those who thought monetary institutions are important and money could be a separate driving force. Both Schumpeter and Keynes were among the latter. Nevertheless, Schumpeter rejected Keynesianism.
Schumpeter and capitalism's demise
Schumpeter's most popular book in English is probably Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. This book opens with a treatment of Karl Marx. While he is sympathetic to Marx's theory that capitalism will collapse and will be replaced by socialism, Schumpeter concludes that this will not come about in the way Marx predicted. To describe it he borrowed the phrase "creative destruction", and made it famous by using it to describe a process in which the old ways of doing things are endogenously destroyed and replaced by new ways.
Schumpeter's theory is that the success of capitalism will lead to a form of corporatism and a fostering of values hostile to capitalism, especially among intellectuals. The intellectual and social climate needed to allow entrepreneurship to thrive will not exist in advanced capitalism; it will be replaced by socialism in some form. There will not be a revolution, but merely a trend in parliaments to elect social democratic parties of one stripe or another. He argued that capitalism's collapse from within will come about as democratic majorities vote for restrictions upon entrepreneurship that will burden and destroy the capitalist structure, but also emphasizes non-political, evolutionary processes in society where "liberal capitalism" was evolving into democratic socialism because of the growth of workers' self-management, industrial democracy and regulatory institutions. Schumpeter emphasizes throughout this book that he is analyzing trends, not engaging in political advocacy. In his vision, the intellectual class will play an important role in capitalism's demise. The term "intellectuals" denotes a class of persons in a position to develop critiques of societal matters for which they are not directly responsible and able to stand up for the interests of strata to which they themselves do not belong. One of the great advantages of capitalism, he argues, is that as compared with pre-capitalist periods, when education was a privilege of the few, more and more people acquire (higher) education. The availability of fulfilling work is however limited and this, coupled with the experience of unemployment, produces discontent. The intellectual class is then able to organize protest and develop critical ideas.
Schumpeter and democratic theory
In the same book, Schumpeter expounded a theory of democracy which sought to challenge what he called the "classical doctrine". He disputed the idea that democracy was a process by which the electorate identified the common good, and politicians carried this out for them. He argued this was unrealistic, and that people's ignorance and superficiality meant that in fact they were largely manipulated by politicians, who set the agenda. This made a 'rule by the people' concept both unlikely and undesirable. Instead he advocated a minimalist model, much influenced by Max Weber, whereby democracy is the mechanism for competition between leaders, much like a market structure. Although periodic votes by the general public legitimize governments and keep them accountable, the policy program is very much seen as their own and not that of the people, and the participatory role for individuals is usually severely limited.
Schumpeter and entrepreneurship
The research of entrepreneurship owes a lot to his contributions. He was probably the first scholar to develop its theories. He gave two theories, sometimes called Mark I and Mark II. In the first one, the early one, Schumpeter argued that the innovation and technological change of a nation comes from the entrepreneurs, or wild spirits. He coined the word Unternehmergeist, German for entrepreneur-spirit. He believed that these individuals are the ones who make things work in the economy of the country. In Mark II, expanded as professor at Harvard, he asserted that the actors that drive innovation and the economy are big companies which have the resources and capital to invest in research and development. Both arguments might be complementary today.
The English literature uses the term entrepreneurship, from the French "entreprise". When studying entrepreneurship and Schumpeter, it is helpful to keep in mind he used the German term (Unternehmergeist), acknowledging these "fiery souls" or "spirits".
Schumpeter and Innovation
Schumpeter identified innovation as the critical dimension of economic change. He argued that economic change revolves around innovation, entrepreneurial activities and market power and sought to prove that innovation-originated market power could provide better results than the invisible hand & price competition. He argues that technological innovation often creates temporary monopolies, allowing abnormal profits that would soon be competed away by rivals and imitators. He said that these temporary monopolies were necessary to provide the incentive necessary for firms to develop new products and processes.
Schumpeter and the Gold Standard
Joseph Schumpeter recognized the implication of a gold monetary standard compared to a fiat monetary standard. In History of Economic Analysis he stated the following:
An ‘automatic’ gold currency is part and parcel of a laissez-faire and free-trade economy. It links every nation’s money rates and price levels with the money-rates and price levels of all the other nations that are ‘on gold.’ It is extremely sensitive to government expenditure and even to attitudes or policies that do not involve expenditure directly, for example, to foreign policy, to certain policies of taxation, and, in general, to precisely all those policies that violate the principles of [classical] liberalism. This is the reason why gold is so unpopular now and also why it was so popular in a bourgeois era. It imposes restrictions upon governments or bureaucracies that are much more powerful than is parliamentary criticism. It is both the badge and the guarantee of bourgeois freedom—of freedom not simply of the bourgeois interest, but of freedom in the bourgeois sense. From this standpoint a man may quite rationally fight for it, even if fully convinced of the validity of all that has ever been urged against it on economic grounds. From the standpoint of etatisme and planning, a man may not less rationally condemn it, even if fully convinced of the validity of all that has ever been urged for it on economic grounds.
—Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysi
His legacy
For some time after his death, Schumpeter's views were most influential among various heterodox economists, especially European, who were interested in industrial organization, evolutionary theory, and economic development, and who tended to be on the other end of the political spectrum from Schumpeter and were also often influenced by Keynes, Karl Marx, and Thorstein Veblen. Robert Heilbroner was one of Schumpeter's most renowned pupils, who wrote extensively about him in The Worldly Philosophers. In the journal Monthly Review John Bellamy Foster wrote of that journal's founder Paul Sweezy, one of the leading Marxist economists in the United States and a graduate assistant of Schumpeter's at Harvard, that Schumpeter "played a formative role in his development as a thinker". Other outstanding students of Schumpeter's include the economists Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen and Hyman Minsky and former chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan. Robert Solow, Nobel Prize in Economics, was his student at Harvard, and he expanded on Schumpeter's theory.
Today, Schumpeter has a following outside of standard textbook economics, in areas such as in economic policy, management studies, industrial policy, and the study of innovation. Schumpeter was probably the first scholar to develop theories about entrepreneurship. For instance, the European Union's innovation program, and its main development plan, the Lisbon Strategy, are influenced by Schumpeter. The International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society awards the Schumpeter Prize.
On 17 September 2009, The Economist inaugurated a column on business and management named "Schumpeter." The publication has a history of naming columns after significant figures or symbols in the covered field, including naming its British affairs column after former editor Walter Bagehot and its European affairs column after Charlemagne. The initial Schumpeter column praised him as a "champion of innovation and entrepreneurship" whose writing showed an understanding of the benefits and dangers of business that proved far ahead of its time.
Major work
* "Über die mathematische Methode der theoretischen Ökonomie", 1906, ZfVSV.
* "Das Rentenprinzip in der Verteilungslehre", 1907, Schmollers Jahrbuch
* Wesen und Hauptinhalt der theoretischen Nationalökonomie (transl. The Nature and Essence of Theoretical Economics), 1908.
* "Methodological Individualism", 1908,
* "On the Concept of Social Value", 1909, QJE
* Wie studiert man Sozialwissenschaft, 1910 (transl. by J.Z. Muller, "How to Study Social Science", Society, 2003)
* "Marie Esprit Leon Walras", 1910, ZfVSV.
* "Über das Wesen der Wirtschaftskrisen", 1910, ZfVSV
* Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung (transl. 1934, The Theory of Economic Development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle) 1911.
* Economic Doctrine and Method: An historical sketch, 1914.
* "Das wissenschaftliche Lebenswerk Eugen von Böhm-Bawerks", 1914, ZfVSV.
* Vergangenkeit und Zukunft der Sozialwissenschaft, 1915.
* The Crisis of the Tax State, 1918.
* "The Sociology of Imperialisms", 1919, Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik
* "Max Weber's Work", 1920, Der österreichische Volkswirt
* "Carl Menger", 1921, ZfVS.
* "The Explanation of the Business Cycle", 1927, Economica
* "Social Classes in an Ethnically Homogeneous Environment", 1927, Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik.
* "The Instability of Capitalism", 1928, EJ
* Das deutsche Finanzproblem, 1928.
* "Mitchell's Business Cycles", 1930, QJE
* "The Present World Depression: A tentative diagnosis", 1931, AER.
* "The Common Sense of Econometrics", 1933, Econometrica
* "Depressions: Can we learn from past experience?", 1934, in Economics of the Recovery Program
* "The Nature and Necessity of a Price System", 1934, Economic Reconstruction.
* "Review of Robinson's Economics of Imperfect Competition", 1934, JPE
* "The Analysis of Economic Change", 1935, REStat.
* "Professor Taussig on Wages and Capital", 1936, Explorations in Economics.
* "Review of Keynes's General Theory", 1936, JASA
* Business Cycles: A theoretical, historical and statistical analysis of the Capitalist process, 1939.
* "The Influence of Protective Tariffs on the Industrial Development of the United States", 1940, Proceedings of AAPS
* "Alfred Marshall's Principles: A semi-centennial appraisal", 1941, AER.
* "Frank William Taussig", 1941, QJE.
* Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942.
* "Capitalism in the Postwar World", 1943, Postwar Economic Problems.
* "John Maynard Keynes", 1946, AER.
* "The Future of Private Enterprise in the Face of Modern Socialistic Tendencies", 1946, Comment sauvegarder l'entreprise privée
* Rudimentary Mathematics for Economists and Statisticians, with W.L.Crum, 1946.
* "Capitalism", 1946, Encyclopædia Britannica.
* "The Decade of the Twenties", 1946, AER
* "The Creative Response in Economic History", 1947, JEH
* "Theoretical Problems of Economic Growth", 1947, JEH
* "Irving Fisher's Econometrics", 1948, Econometrica.
* "There is Still Time to Stop Inflation", 1948, Nation's Business.
* "Science and Ideology", 1949, AER.
* "Vilfredo Pareto", 1949, QJE.
* "Economic Theory and Entrepreneurial History", 1949, Change and the Entrepreneur
* "The Communist Manifesto in Sociology and Economics", 1949, JPE
* "English Economists and the State-Managed Economy", 1949, JPE
* "The Historical Approach to the Analysis of Business Cycles", 1949, NBER Conference on Business Cycle Research.
* "Wesley Clair Mitchell", 1950, QJE.
* "March into Socialism", 1950, AER.
* Ten Great Economists: From Marx to Keynes, 1951.
* Imperialism and Social Classes, 1951 (reprints of 1919, 1927)
* Essays on Economic Topics, 1951.
* "Review of the Troops", 1951, QJE.
* History of Economic Analysis, (published posthumously, ed. Elisabeth Boody Schumpeter), 1954.
* "American Institutions and Economic Progress", 1983, Zeitschrift fur die gesamte Staatswissenschaft
* "The Meaning of Rationality in the Social Sciences", 1984, Zeitschrift fur die gesamte Staatswissenschaft
* "Money and Currency", 1991, Social Research.
* Economics and Sociology of Capitalism, 1991.