A theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world

The neoclassical case supporting competitive frames and market solutions has failed to promote stable world-wide economic development. Other approaches in economics incorporate social culture, increasing returns, market power, ecological limits and complementarity, yielding broader applications for...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Frederic B. Jennings, Jr.
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	DE EN FR
Publicado:	Editura ASE Bucuresti 2012
Materias:	Growth Complementarity Planning horizons Economics as a science HB71-74
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/06f57fb7762c407c93a8f462da94ccb2
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:06f57fb7762c407c93a8f462da94ccb2
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:06f57fb7762c407c93a8f462da94ccb22021-12-02T01:36:35ZA theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world1843-22981844-8208https://doaj.org/article/06f57fb7762c407c93a8f462da94ccb22012-05-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.jpe.ro/poze/articole/69.pdfhttps://doaj.org/toc/1843-2298https://doaj.org/toc/1844-8208The neoclassical case supporting competitive frames and market solutions has failed to promote stable world-wide economic development. Other approaches in economics incorporate social culture, increasing returns, market power, ecological limits and complementarity, yielding broader applications for development theory. In this paper a theory of planning horizons is introduced to raise some meaningful questions about the traditional view with respect to its substitution, decreasing returns and independence assumptions. Suppositions of complementarity, increasing returns and interdependence suggest that competition is inefficient by upholding a myopic culture resistant to learning. Growth – though long believed to rise from markets and competitive values – may not derive from these sources. Instead, as civilizations advance, shifting from material wants to higher-order intangible output, they evolve from market tradeoffs (substitution and scarcity) into realms of common need (complementarity and abundance). The policy implications of horizonal theory are explored, with respect to regulatory aims and economic concerns. Such an approach emphasizes strict constraints against entry barriers, ecological harm, market power abuse and ethical lapses. Social cohesion – not competition – is sought as a means to extend horizons and thereby increase efficiency, equity and ecological health. The overriding importance of horizon effects for regulatory assessment dominates other orthodox standards in economics and law. Reframing economics along horizonal lines suggests some meaningful insight on the proper design of economic systems.Frederic B. Jennings, Jr.Editura ASE BucurestiarticleGrowthComplementarityPlanning horizonsEconomics as a scienceHB71-74DEENFRJournal of Philosophical Economics, Vol V, Iss 2, Pp 5-37 (2012)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	DE EN FR
topic	Growth Complementarity Planning horizons Economics as a science HB71-74
spellingShingle	Growth Complementarity Planning horizons Economics as a science HB71-74 Frederic B. Jennings, Jr. A theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world
description	The neoclassical case supporting competitive frames and market solutions has failed to promote stable world-wide economic development. Other approaches in economics incorporate social culture, increasing returns, market power, ecological limits and complementarity, yielding broader applications for development theory. In this paper a theory of planning horizons is introduced to raise some meaningful questions about the traditional view with respect to its substitution, decreasing returns and independence assumptions. Suppositions of complementarity, increasing returns and interdependence suggest that competition is inefficient by upholding a myopic culture resistant to learning. Growth – though long believed to rise from markets and competitive values – may not derive from these sources. Instead, as civilizations advance, shifting from material wants to higher-order intangible output, they evolve from market tradeoffs (substitution and scarcity) into realms of common need (complementarity and abundance). The policy implications of horizonal theory are explored, with respect to regulatory aims and economic concerns. Such an approach emphasizes strict constraints against entry barriers, ecological harm, market power abuse and ethical lapses. Social cohesion – not competition – is sought as a means to extend horizons and thereby increase efficiency, equity and ecological health. The overriding importance of horizon effects for regulatory assessment dominates other orthodox standards in economics and law. Reframing economics along horizonal lines suggests some meaningful insight on the proper design of economic systems.
format	article
author	Frederic B. Jennings, Jr.
author_facet	Frederic B. Jennings, Jr.
author_sort	Frederic B. Jennings, Jr.
title	A theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world
title_short	A theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world
title_full	A theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world
title_fullStr	A theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world
title_full_unstemmed	A theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world
title_sort	theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world
publisher	Editura ASE Bucuresti
publishDate	2012
url	https://doaj.org/article/06f57fb7762c407c93a8f462da94ccb2
work_keys_str_mv	AT fredericbjenningsjr atheoryofplanninghorizons1marketdesigninapostneoclassicalworld AT fredericbjenningsjr theoryofplanninghorizons1marketdesigninapostneoclassicalworld
_version_	1718402939423293440

A theory of planning horizons (1): market design in a post-neoclassical world

Ejemplares similares