On classical liberalism and democratic optimism: James M. Buchanan and Elinor Ostrom

IF 0.5 Q4 ECONOMICS
Marianne Johnson
{"title":"On classical liberalism and democratic optimism: James M. Buchanan and Elinor Ostrom","authors":"Marianne Johnson","doi":"10.1332/251569121x16730281636465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We recently marked the 60th anniversary of the book that established the field of public choice – The Calculus of Consent by James M. Buchanan and Gordon Tullock. It was also the 30th anniversary of Elinor Ostrom et al’s ‘Covenants with and without a sword’, in which she demonstrated the capacity of individuals for self-governance without submission to an external authority. This article considers these two foundational works as a starting point from which to explore the intellectual tradition of ‘democratic optimism’ in public choice. The Buchanan/Ostrom legacy is an unshakable faith in the capacity of individuals for self-governance, a significant departure from more orthodox thinking that presumed the necessity of a social planner to oversee, coordinate and enforce collective actions. Their work also illustrates the importance of questioning the assumptions of economic models and modes of thought. Examination of antecedent assumptions is useful not only for understanding the depth and complexity of economic and political choices, but also for thinking about the history of the economics discipline, the viability of research programmes and the ‘danger of self-evident truths’.","PeriodicalId":53126,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/251569121x16730281636465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We recently marked the 60th anniversary of the book that established the field of public choice – The Calculus of Consent by James M. Buchanan and Gordon Tullock. It was also the 30th anniversary of Elinor Ostrom et al’s ‘Covenants with and without a sword’, in which she demonstrated the capacity of individuals for self-governance without submission to an external authority. This article considers these two foundational works as a starting point from which to explore the intellectual tradition of ‘democratic optimism’ in public choice. The Buchanan/Ostrom legacy is an unshakable faith in the capacity of individuals for self-governance, a significant departure from more orthodox thinking that presumed the necessity of a social planner to oversee, coordinate and enforce collective actions. Their work also illustrates the importance of questioning the assumptions of economic models and modes of thought. Examination of antecedent assumptions is useful not only for understanding the depth and complexity of economic and political choices, but also for thinking about the history of the economics discipline, the viability of research programmes and the ‘danger of self-evident truths’.
论古典自由主义和民主乐观主义:詹姆斯·m·布坎南和埃莉诺·奥斯特罗姆
最近,我们纪念了詹姆斯·M·布坎南和戈登·图洛克的《同意演算》一书问世60周年。这也是Elinor Ostrom等人的“有剑和无剑盟约”30周年纪念日,在该盟约中,她展示了个人在不服从外部权威的情况下进行自治的能力。本文以这两部基础著作为切入点,探讨公共选择中“民主乐观主义”的思想传统。布坎南/奥斯特罗姆的遗产是对个人自治能力的不可动摇的信念,这与更正统的思想大相径庭,后者认为社会规划师有必要监督、协调和执行集体行动。他们的工作也说明了质疑经济模型和思维模式假设的重要性。研究先前的假设不仅有助于理解经济和政治选择的深度和复杂性,也有助于思考经济学学科的历史、研究计划的可行性和“不言自明的真理的危险”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信