You are here

Home » Content

İKTİSAT, KURUMSAL İKTİSAT VE İKTİSAT SOSYOLOJİSİ

ECONOMICS, INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMICS AND ECONOMIC SOCIOLOGY

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Konferansları Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The division that existed between economics and sociology survived until the 1970s. Economics focuses on the market by emphasizing the framework of rational choice under the constraints of given preferences, whereas sociology emphasizes the roles of culture, structures and values. These disciplinary definitions changed radically after the 1970s, when both new institutional economics and economic sociology made significant achievements in terms of both theory and research. The nature of the relationship between orthodoxy and heterodoxy in economics also radically changed after the 1970s. The aim of this paper is to discuss the relationship between economics and sociology by focusing on the developments in orthodoxy and heterodoxy in economics. As the label of institutional economics is used by both orthodoxy and heterodoxy, the paper will also focus on institutional economics.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
İktisat ile sosyoloji arasında 1970’li yıllara kadar devam eden bir entelektüel işbölümü mevcuttu. İktisat rasyonel seçim teorisi çerçevesinde piyasa analizine odaklanırken, sosyoloji ise yapılar, kültür ve değerleri açıklamaya odaklanmıştı. Yeni kurumsal iktisat ile iktisat sosyolojisinin gelişimi ile birlikte bu disiplin tanımları 1970’li yıllar başlarında radikal bir biçimde değişmeye başladı. İktisatta ortodoksi ile heterodoksi arasındaki ilişkinin doğası da aynı yıllarda hızla değişmeye başladı. Bu çalışmanın amacı iktisatta ortodoksi ve heterodoksideki gelişmelere odaklanarak iktisat ile sosyoloji arasındaki ilişkiyi tartışmaktır. Kurumsal iktisat hem ortodoks hem de heterodoks iktisadın kullandığı bir tanım olduğundan, tartışma bu okul üzerinden yürütülecektir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-iktisat-kurumsal-iktisat-iktisat-sosyolojisi.pdf
  • 46
1-17
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Beckert, J. (1996), “What Is Sociological about Economic Sociology? Uncertainty and the Embeddedness of Economic Action”, Theory and Society
25, 803–840.
Beckert, J. (2003), “Economic Sociology and Embeddedness: How Shall We Conceptualize Economic Action?” Journal of Economic Issues 37: 3, 769-87.
Bernstein, R. J. (1983), Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxis, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Bögenhold, D. (2010), “From Heterodoxy to Othodoxy and Vice Versa: Economics and Social Sciences in the Division of Academic Work”, American
Journal of Economics and Sociology, 69: 5, 1566-1590.Caille, A. (2007), “Sociology as Anti-Utilitarianism”, European Journal of Social Theory, 10: 2, 277-286.
Clarke, S. (1982), Marx, Marginalism and Modern Sociology, London: Macmillan
Colander, D. (2000) The death of neoclassical economics, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 22, 127–143.
Colander, D., Holt, R. P. F. and Rosser, J. B., (2004), “The Changing Face of Mainstream Economics”, Review of Political Economy, 16: 4, 485-499.
Davis, J. B. (2006), “The Nature of Heterodox Economics”, Post-Autistic Economics Review, 40, 23-30.
Davis, J. B. (2008), “The Turn in Recent Economics and Return of Orthodoxy”,
Cambridge Journal of Economics, 32, 349-366.
Dow, S. C. (2011), “Heterodox Economics: History and Prospects”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 35, 1151-1165.
Frey, B. and Benz, M. (2004), “From Imperialism to Inspiration: A Survey of Economics and Psychology”, D. J., Marciano, A. and R. J. (eds), The Elgar Companion to Economics and Philosophy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Granovetter, M. (1985), “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness”, American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510.
Granovetter, M. (1992), “Economic Institutions as Social Constructions: A Framework for Analysis”, Acta Sociologica, 35, 3-11.
Groenewegen, J., C. Pitelis, and S-E. Sjostrand (eds.) (1995), On Economic
Institutions, Theory and Application, Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
Heiskala, R. (2007), “Economy and Society: from Parsons through Habermas
to Semiotic Institutionalism”, Theory and Methods, 46: 2, 243-272.
Hodgson, G. M. (1994), “The Return of Institutional Economics”, N.Smelser and R. Swedberg (eds.) The Handbook of Economic Sociology, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hodgson, G. M. (2004), The Evolution of Institutional Economics, Agency, Structure and Darwinism in American Institutionalism, London: Routlege.
Hodgson, G. M. (2008), “Prospects for Economic Sociology”, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 38: 1, 133-149.
Ingham, G. (1996), “Some Recent Changes in the Relationship Between Economics and Sociology”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 20, 243-275.Joas, H. (1993), Pragmatism and Social Theory. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Joas, H. (1996), The Creativity of Action. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Kalberg, S. (2007), “A Cross-National Consensus on a Unified Sociological
Theory? Some Inter-Cultural Obstacles”, European Journal of Social Theory, 10: 2, 206-219.
Kilpinen, E. (2003), “Does Pragmatism Imply Institutionalism.” Journal of Economic Issues, 37: 2 291-304.
Lawson, T. (2006), “The Nature of Heterodox Economics”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 30, 483-505.
Lee, F. S. (2010), “A Case for Ranking Heterodox Journals and Departments”,
On the Horizon, 16: 4, 241-251.
O’Hara, P. A. (2010), “Can the Principles of Heterodox Political Economy Explain Its Own Re-Emergence and Development?”, On the Horizon, 16: 4, 260-278.
Parsons, T. ([1937] 1968), The Structure of Social Action, New York: The Free Press.
Robbins, L. (1932), An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic
Science. London: Macmillan
Rorty, R. (1981), Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Rutherford, M. (2011), The Institutionalist Movement in American Economics,
1918-1947, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smelser, N. J. And R. Swedberg (1994), “The Sociological Perspective on the Economy”, N. J. Smelser and R. Swedberg (eds.), The Handbook of Economic Sociology, Princetion: Princeton University Press.
Swedberg, R. (1991), “Major Traditions of Economic Sociology”, Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 251-276.
Swedberg, R. (2003), Principles of Economic Sociology, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Veblen, T. B. ([1923] 1964) Absentee Ownership and Business Enterprise in Recent Times. New York: Augustus M. Kelley.
Veblen, T. B. ([1919] 1990), The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and Other Essays. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Veblen, T. B. ([1921] 1990), The Engineers and the Price System. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Veblen, T. B. ([1899] 1994), The Theory of Leisure Class. New York: Dover Publications.
Velthuis, O. (1999), “The Changing Relationship Between Economic Sociology and Institutional Economics: From Talcott Parsons to Mark Granovetter”,
American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 58: 4, 629-649.
Yılmaz, F. (2003), “İktisat ve Sosyoloji: Rakip Kardeşlerin Hakimiyet Kavgası”, Toplum ve Bilim, 95, 61-84
Yılmaz, F. (2007), “Veblen and the Problem of Rationality”, Journal of Economic Issues, 41: 3, 841-862.
Yılmaz, F. (2011), “Düşünceden Kaçış Çabasının Öyküsü: İktisadın Felsefeden
Kopuşu”, O. İşler ve F. Yılmaz (der.) İktisadı Felsefeyle Düşünmek, İstanbul: İletişim
Yonay, Y. and Breslau, D. (2006), “Marketing Models: The Culture of Mathematical Economics”, Sociological Forum, 21: 3, 345-386.
Young, C. (2009), “The Emergence of Sociology from Political Economy in the United States: 1890 to 1940”, Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 45: 2, 91-116.
Zafirovski, M. (2004), “Paradigms for Analysis of Social Institutions: A case for sociological institutionalism”, International Review of Sociology: Revue Internationale de Sociologie, 14:3, 363-397.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com