|
| |
| Anna Klimina |
| |
| ''On misuse of the term “institutionalist” in the analysis of Russian academic economics of the late 19th and early 20th centuries: the case of Michail Tugan-Baranovsky (1865-1919)'' |
| ( 2008, Vol. 2 No.2 ) |
| |
| |
| The paper questions the appropriateness of using an “institutionalist” label regarding the analysis of Michail Tugan-Baranovsky's (1865-1919) theoretical legacy. It is argued that Tugan-Baranovsky''s views cannot be considered either the Russian type of Institutionalism or the national version of the German Historical School (Barnett, 2004) due to their ideological eclecticism and serious methodological distinctions from the heterodox schools of thought mentioned above. In particular, the paper discusses Tugan''s views on the course of societal dynamics which, in the author''s opinion, represent an example of teleological evolutionarism and lie outside the framework of institutionalist paradigm, and Tugan''s approach to the value theory as it was summarized in his last (1919) methodological article, and is ideologically shared with neoclassical economics. It is concluded that Tugan-Baranovsky should be branded not as an institutionalist or historical economist but as an eclectic one. |
| |
| |
| Keywords: |
JEL: B1 - History of Thought through 1925: General
B3 - History of Thought: Individuals: General |
| |
| Manuscript Received : Nov 12 2008 | | Manuscript Accepted : Nov 18 2008 |
|
