【作者】 汤正仁；

【导师】 颜鹏飞；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 经济思想史， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 迄今为止,还没有对西方经济演化分析进行历史研究的专门著作。当然,这并不等于以前的经济学家们没有对该问题进行过探讨,由于经济过程是动态的、演化的,客观、科学的经济理论也不同程度地含有演化分析的成分,因此,对经济学说或经济理论的历史考察,均或多或少地含有对经济演化分析进行历史考察的内容。斯密、李斯特、西斯蒙第、马克思、马歇尔、熊彼特等人都作过类似工作,但18世纪至20世纪的经济学家们,经济演化分析只是他们整个经济理论史考察的一个极小部分,且并非以此为主题,更远谈不上系统和完整。从20世纪末期到新世纪的来临,演化经济学异军突起,霍奇逊、贾根良等人对演化经济学进行了历史考察,但此种考察往往以“演化经济学”概念的提出者凡勃伦为起始点,且霍奇逊以“新事象”、“反还原论”、“生物学”隐喻等为标准,将马克思、熊彼特等大批经济学家排除在演化经济学家之外,这就使经济演化分析思想考察的时空领域局限在一个十分狭窄的范围内。本文认为,经济演化不仅此于生物学意义上的“自然选择”,也不仅此于“新事象”的引入,而是指经济主体在运行过程中,通过学习行为引致新技术、新产品和新产业的出现,进而引致新的产业组织结构和运行规则的变化以及社会经济关系的相应变化的过程。这一概念既包含了经济的技术层面和制度层面的新变化,也包含了这种新变化中的“个体发生”和“系统发生”的种群关系。只有技术层面而无制度层面的新变化,或只有制度层面而无技术层面的新变化,还只能称之为“技术演化”或“制度演化”,不能称之为“经济演化”；另一方面,只有经济“个体的演化”而无经济“系统的演化”,如一个企业采用了新技术和新制度但并未对整个经济系统造成实质上的影响,仍然不能称之为“经济演化”。还须指出的是,新技术、新产品、新制度的引进引致的“经济演化”,并非一定会带来经济系统的进步或提升,“经济演化”存在着风险,从效率和给人们带来的福利方面看,“经济演化”既有可能提高效率和人们的福利水平,也有可能降低效率和人们的福利水平；在提高总体效率的同时,既有可能提高每位社会成员的福利水平,也有可能只提高少部分成员的福利,大多数社会成员没有或很少享受到总体效率提高带来的福利,更有甚者,社会总福利提高的同时,其中部分社会成员的福利水平不仅没提高反而降低。明确这一点,使我们能够更清醒地认识到“经济演化”具有的“不确定性”和“随机性”。也使我们能够更多地关注经济演化与社会进步、经济演化与社会全体成员和各阶层成员经济福利之间的关系,促使经济演化朝着社会进步和全体社会成员共享进步成果的方向,尽可能避免经济演化造成社会退步、或者进步而不能使多数人获益的情况。这样一来,我们的研究就摆脱了经济演化分析的完全实证性,而是实证分析与规范分析的结合,事实研究与价值判断的结合,“自然秩序”与社会政策的结合。按照上述经济演化概念,凡是对经济演化过程进行过探讨的有代表性的西方经济理论,均属于本文的考察对象。这就使本论文成为研究西方经济演化分析的专门著作。本文在唯物史观指导下,运用历史与逻辑相一致的方法、复杂性分析等方法,将各种有代表性的经济演化分析归入古典经济学、历史主义、制度主义、熊彼特主义、西方马克思主义、生物学隐喻、发展经济学、复杂性分析、奥地利学派、新经济史学等传统,张扬各种分析传统的个性特征与贡献,揭示它们之间的相互关系,发现它们之间所具有的交融趋势,尝试提出发展马克思主义演化经济学的思想。分析发现,不仅当代演化经济学的几大流派中的法国调节学派属于马克思主义演化分析传统,巴兰、谢尔曼、拉佐尼克等美国学者也秉承了马克思主义的演化分析传统,老制度主义传统与马克思主义有许多共同点,熊彼特主义分析传统也与马克思主义有不少交融之处。就是复杂性分析,诺斯的经济变迁和路径依赖的演化思想,纳尔逊和温特的惯例遗传和复制,新奇事物产生的变异,搜寻和选择等思想,并非互不相容,而是可以相互借鉴、补充和丰富完善,并用以发展马克思主义演化经济学的。发展马克思主义演化经济学,可以以“唯物史观”为基础,强调生产力从而知识和技术的进步作为经济系统演化的终极原因,发扬光大生产关系和生产方式对技术进步和生产力进步的重要反作用的思想,发扬光大运用政府的法律制度和政策等上层建筑促进生产方式的巩固和技术进步,发扬光大“车间的竞争优势”对微观经济的分析和对宏观经济产生的影响,发扬光大法国调节学派的由工业范式、积累体系和调节模式构成的发展模式的思想；吸收熊彼特传统中知识和技术创新在技术进步和生产力进步中的关键作用的思想,吸收老制度主义分析传统和生物学隐喻分析传统中的生物演化思想,吸收新熊彼特学派的不确定性、不可逆性、中观部门结构对宏观经济和微观经济系统的重大作用的思想,吸收哈耶克的充分调动每个个体能动性的自由主义思想,吸收复杂性科学分析方法中的混沌到有序、相变和序参量、突变、多因素代理模型等思想和方法,吸收诺斯的经济演化的路径依赖思想,吸收发展经济学中提出的优秀的演化思想。形成一个以“唯物史观”为基础的比较完整的演化经济学体系。更多还原

【Abstract】 So far, no analysis of Western economic history the evolution of specialized work. Of course, this does not mean that economists have not previously been discussed in this issue. As economic process is dynamic, evolving, objective and scientific economic theory, with different degrees of evolution of the composition., so economics or economic theory on the history of investigation, are more or less with the history of the economic evolution of the content analysis. Simth, List, Sismondi, Marx, Marshall, Schumpeter and others have made similar work. But the 18th century to the 20th century economists, the economic evolution of the economic theory is that they examine a small part of history, and it is this theme, not to mention the system longer and complete. From the late 20th century into the new century, evolutionary economics has sprung up everywhere. Hodgson, JiagenLiang and others on the evolution of economics from historical. However, such study is often the "evolutionary economics" concept as a starting point the authors of Veblen, and Hodgson to the "new things like", "Biology" metaphor as the standard, Marx, Schumpeter, and many other economic outside scientists out of the evolution of economists, which makes economic analysis of space-time evolution of the field confined to a very narrow range.This paper argues that this economic evolution not only the "natural selection" in the biological sense, not just here in the "new things like" of introduction, but rather the process of economic entities in operation, learning behavior caused by new technologies, new products and new industry, the emergence of new industries and thus lead to organizational structure and operation of the rules changes and corresponding changes in the socio-economic relations between the process of. This concept includes both the technical aspects of economic and institutional dimensions of the new changes, also include the new changes of the relations between "ontogeny" and "phylogeny", seeds and clusters. Only the technical aspects of the new changes without institutional level, or only the institutional level without the new changes in the technical level, it can only be called "technical evolution" or "institutional evolution" can not be called "economic evolution". On the other hand, only the economy "the evolution of the individual", no economy "system evolution", such as an enterprise adoption of new technologies and the new institution but did not cause the whole essence of the economic system, still can not be called "economic Evolution". Also noted that the introduction of the new technology, new product, new institution due to "economic evolution", not necessarily lead to economic progress or improve the system. "Economic evolution" of the risk, efficiency and bring people from welfare perspective, "economic evolution" may increase both the efficiency and people’s welfare, may also reduce efficiency and people’s welfare; in improving the overall efficiency, both may increase the level of benefits for each member of society, there are probably only a small number of members of society with little or no overall enjoy the benefits of increased efficiency; more even persons, social welfare increase, while some members of society, not only did not increase the level of benefits will decrease. Clear on this point, so that we can more clearly recognize "economic evolution" with the "uncertainty" and "random". Also allows us to pay more attention to economic evolution and social progress, economic evolution and all members of society and all sectors of economic well-being between the members, to promote social progress and economic evolution towards all members of society to share the results of the direction of progress, as far as possible to avoid causing economic evolution of social regress, or progress, most people can not benefit from the situation. Thus our research on the economic evolution out of the full empirical analysis, but the combination of empirical analysis and normative analysis, the combination of the fact that the combination of research and value judgment, "natural order" and the combination of social policy.In accordance with the concept of economic evolution, all conducted on the economic evolution of the representative of Western economic theory, the study belong to this object. This makes this paper a study of Western economic evolution of specialized work. In this paper, under of guidance of historical materialism, using the method which combination of history and logic, the complexity of analysis, will be a variety of economic evolution of the representative included in the different traditions of classical economics, historicism, institutionalism, Schumpeterian, Western Marxism, biological metaphor, development economics, complexity analysis, Austrian School, New Economic History, etc. This article pointed out a variety of traditional personality and contribution to reveal the relationship between them and found they have a blend between the trend, try to put the development of Marxist ideas of evolutionary economics.Analysis found that not only the French Regulation school in a few large modern evolutionary economics school is the evolution of the Marxist tradition, Balaam, Sherman, Lazuonike, etc. U. S. scholars also adhering to a Marxist analysis of the evolution of the traditional; the old institutionalism tradition and Marxist have much in common; Schumpeterian tradition of Marxist analysis, many blend between; is the complexity of the analysis, North’s economic changes and path dependent evolution of thinking, Nelson and Winter’s practice of genetic and replication, novel variations in things, search and selection of ideas, not mutually exclusive, but can learn from each other, supplement and enrich perfect, and for the development of Marxist evolutionary economics.The development of Marxist evolutionary economics, can be "historical materialism" as the foundation, emphasizing productivity and thus the progress of knowledge and technology as the ultimate reason for the evolution of economic systems, carried forward the idea of important role of the relation of production and the method of production to the progress of technical and productivity; carry forward the use of the legal system and government policy superstructure for the consolidation of production and technological progress; carry forward the "workshop of competitive advantage" of the micro-economic analysis and macroeconomic implication; carry forward the French Regulation School industrial paradigm accumulation system and the regulation model, which forms the ideological model of development. Absorbing Schumpeterian idea of the key role of knowledge and technological innovation and progress in the technological progress and productivity; absorbing the idea of biological evolution of old institutionalism tradition and biological metaphor; absorbing the thought of the New Schumpeterian uncertainty, irreversibility, in view of the important role of sector structure to the macroeconomic and the micro-economic systems; absorbing the full mobilization of Hayek’s liberalism for each individual activity; absorption Complexity Science Analysis Method of chaos to order, phase transition and order parameter, mutation, multi-agent model factors such as ideology methods; absorption North’s economic evolution path dependency, and absorb the proposed development economics in the evolution of good ideas. The formation of a "historical materialism" as the foundation of a relatively complete system of evolutionary economics.更多还原