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·Oct 6, 2026
Jacob Goldin and David Weisbach
Topics: Uncategorized
BFI Working Paper·Aug 4, 2026

Two Selection Problems, One Bias Term: Experimental Sign-Up Is Treatment Choice in Disguise

John List
Topics: Uncategorized
BFI Working Paper·Jun 23, 2026

Misleading Estimates from Nonlinear Models with a Binary Outcome

Brian Curran, Bruce Meyer, and Derek Wu
Topics: Uncategorized