政治經濟學的定位和發展－奧地利經濟學派的觀點

The Definition and Development of Political Economy: A viewpoint from Austrian School of Economics

黃春興(Chun-Sin Hwang)

《政治與社會哲學評論》 10期 (2004/09) Pp. 83-119

https://doi.org/10.6523/168451532004090010003

摘要

由於經濟學和人文社會學的發展和雙面夾殺，政治經濟學已無法在社會科學領域中圈出專屬的研究範圍，必須發展成和這兩者平行獨立的學門，也就是定位在整個社會科學領域的研究。由於奧地利經濟學派的發展歷史是和政治經濟學攜手同步，而其理論嚴謹度與經濟學相同，其關懷議題的寬廣度亦同於人文社會學界，因此本文認為：政治經濟學最有可能發展成獨立之學問體系的道路，是回到奧地利經濟學派再重新出發。本文也從奧地利經濟學派理論角度，分別就全球、中國大陸、台灣三領域指出現今社會所面臨的政治經濟議題，其中屬於台灣的議題是：台灣在民主深化過程中是否有能力發展出一套遊戲規則，有效地限制民主程序的無限權力，以確保經濟運作不受政治力量的干擾？

並列摘要

The expansion of Economics and the development of the interdisciplinary integration among Humanity and other social sciences leave no exclusively studying area for Political Economy. It is so clear that the only surviving way of Political Economy is to claim the whole domain of social sciences as its studying domain. Since the development of Austrian school of Economics helps the development of Political Economy in history, this paper argues that, in order to claim the whole domain, the Political Economy has to be reconstructed from the core of Austrian school of Economics. Based on this school, I propose some contemporary and further political economic issues, including that of searching rules to constrain the unlimited political powers misbelieved in Taiwan during the progress of democracy and to protect the free market.

參考文獻

Bardhan, Pranab,Roemer, John(1993).Market Socialism: The Current Debate.Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Bostaph, Samuel(1994).in The Elgar Companion to Austrian Economics.VT:Edward Elgar.

Buchanan, James M(1986).in Liberty, market and state: political, economy in the 1980s.Brighton:Wheatsheaf Books.

Buchanan, James M(1984).in The Theory of Public Choice II.University of Michigan Press.

Buchanan, James M(1975).The Limits of Liberty: Between Anarchy and Leviathan.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.