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)

Anna Klimina ()
Additional contact information
Anna Klimina: University of Saskatchewan, St. Thomas More College

Economics Bulletin, 2008, vol. 2, issue 2, 1-9

Abstract: 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.

JEL-codes: B1 B3 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008-11-18
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.accessecon.com/pubs/EB/2008/Volume2/EB-08B10002A.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-08b10002

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Economics Bulletin from AccessEcon
Bibliographic data for series maintained by John P. Conley ().