A Concept of Two Authors: Commons and Williamson on Transactions

IF 0.4 Q4 ECONOMICS Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics Pub Date : 2021-08-27 DOI:10.1177/02601079211037482
S. Guedes, R. Jerônimo
{"title":"A Concept of Two Authors: Commons and Williamson on Transactions","authors":"S. Guedes, R. Jerônimo","doi":"10.1177/02601079211037482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The idea of transactions in social sciences was conceived by John Rogers Commons in the beginning of the 1920s, representing a mental instrument capable of describing capitalism and its peculiarities. On the other hand, Oliver Williamson’s approach in late 1970s reduced the concept to the mere transfer of goods and services in institutions that are or are not guided by the price system. The aim of this article is to present the characteristics of these two different approaches to the concept of transactions, evidencing the role of epistemological aspects and investigative purposes (referred to relevant research context and problem originated in it) as the causes of its metamorphosis. John Commons’ effort to build up a concept not only capable of transcending the idea of exchange but also of giving a totalising perspective to the interpretation of capitalism is emptied in Williamson’s appropriation of the term. By utilising Commons’ conception of transactions and trying to subsume it to his ‘general theory of transaction costs’, Williamson limits its scope and meaning, adjusting it without producing rupture with the neoclassical economy. This article tries to catch the vicissitudes of this concept found in both authors. JEL: B15, B25, B31","PeriodicalId":42664,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02601079211037482","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The idea of transactions in social sciences was conceived by John Rogers Commons in the beginning of the 1920s, representing a mental instrument capable of describing capitalism and its peculiarities. On the other hand, Oliver Williamson’s approach in late 1970s reduced the concept to the mere transfer of goods and services in institutions that are or are not guided by the price system. The aim of this article is to present the characteristics of these two different approaches to the concept of transactions, evidencing the role of epistemological aspects and investigative purposes (referred to relevant research context and problem originated in it) as the causes of its metamorphosis. John Commons’ effort to build up a concept not only capable of transcending the idea of exchange but also of giving a totalising perspective to the interpretation of capitalism is emptied in Williamson’s appropriation of the term. By utilising Commons’ conception of transactions and trying to subsume it to his ‘general theory of transaction costs’, Williamson limits its scope and meaning, adjusting it without producing rupture with the neoclassical economy. This article tries to catch the vicissitudes of this concept found in both authors. JEL: B15, B25, B31
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两位作者的概念:Commons和Williamson谈交易
社会科学中的交易概念是由约翰·罗杰斯·康姆斯在20世纪20年代初提出的,代表了一种能够描述资本主义及其特殊性的心理工具。另一方面,奥利弗·威廉姆森在20世纪70年代末的方法将这一概念简化为在受或不受价格体系指导的机构中进行商品和服务的转移。本文的目的是呈现这两种不同的交易概念方法的特征,证明认识论方面和调查目的(指相关的研究背景和由此产生的问题)是交易概念变形的原因。约翰·康姆斯(John Commons)试图建立一个概念,不仅能够超越交换的概念,而且能够为资本主义的解释提供一个全面的视角,但在威廉姆森(Williamson)对这个词的挪用中,这一努力被清空了。威廉姆森利用了Commons的交易概念,并试图将其纳入他的“交易成本一般理论”中,从而限制了其范围和意义,在不与新古典经济决裂的情况下对其进行了调整。这篇文章试图捕捉这一概念在两位作者身上的变化。JEL:B15、B25、B31
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The explosion of information and research that has taken place in recent years has had a profound effect upon a variety of existing academic disciplines giving rise to the dissolution of barriers between some, mergers between others, and the creation of entirely new fields of enquiry.
期刊最新文献
Dynamic Evolution Analysis of Cryptocurrency Market: A Network Science Study Green Transitions in Developing Countries: Perspectives on Women’s Political Leadership Can Cryptocurrencies Provide Better Diversification Benefits? Evidence from the Indian Stock Market A Bibliographic Review of Illusion of Knowledge in the Financial Field Assessment and Forecasting of the Military, Economic and Demographic Impact of the Russian–Ukrainian War on the National Economy of Russia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1