posted on 2019-02-19, 14:40authored byGeoff Hodgson
Market universalism refers to the non-metaphorical tendency to use the term market
to describe a wide variety of arrangements or processes in the real world. Using institutional criteria, this paper establishes some minimal necessary features of a market, to show that some particular arrangements are not markets. For example, while
mechanisms of competition and interaction are ubiquitous, ordinary conversation is
not literally a ‘market for ideas’ and much of politics is not literally a ‘political market’. Markets are not and cannot be universal. Yet market universalism overlooks
missing markets, the theory of which implies that we are in a world of second-best
solutions and that markets are not necessarily the answer to every economic problem. Also, by reducing politics to a form of ‘market’ economics, market universalism
downplays the distinctive, non-market nature of the political and legal spheres and
corrodes the conceptual separation of civil society from the state.
History
School
Loughborough University London
Published in
Socio-Economic Review
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
1153–1174
Citation
HODGSON, G.M., 2019. How mythical markets mislead analysis: an institutionalist critique of market universalism. Socio-Economic Review, 18(4), pp. 1153–1174.
This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Socio-Economic Review following peer review. The version of record HODGSON, G.M., 2019. How mythical markets mislead analysis: an institutionalist critique of market universalism. Socio-Economic Review, In Press is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwy049