For most economists the terms “Chicago economics” and “institutionalism” denote clearly antithetical approaches to the discipline. Various members of the modern “Chicago School” have made highly dismissive remarks concerning American institutionalism. Coase has commented that American institutionalists were anti-theoretical, and that “without a theory they had nothing to pass on except a mass of descriptive material waiting for a theory, or a fire” (Coase 1984, p. 230). Some of these attitudes have their roots in the interwar period, most obviously in Frank Knight’s bitingly critical attacks on the methodology and policy positions of institutionalist and advocates of the “social control” of business (Knight 1932). Nevertheless, what this presentation seeks to reveal is a much more complex interrelation between institutional and Chicago economics. To fully understand this relationship it is necessary to begin with the early years of the Chicago Department of Economics.

More on this topic

BFI Working Paper·Feb 20, 2025

Non est Disputandum de Generalizability? A Glimpse into The External Validity Trial

John List
Topics: Uncategorized
BFI Working Paper·Feb 18, 2025

How Costly Are Business Cycle Volatility and Inflation? A Vox Populi Approach

Dimitris Georgarakos, Kwang Hwan Kim, Olivier Coibion, Myungkyu Shim, Myunghwan Andrew Lee, Yuriy Gorodnichenko, Geoff Kenny, Seowoo Han, and Michael Weber
Topics: Uncategorized
BFI Working Paper·Feb 14, 2025

Decisions Under Risk are Decisions Under Complexity: Comment

Daniel Banki, Uri Simonsohn, Robert Walatka, and George Wu
Topics: Uncategorized