Theories of "Endogeneous Growth": a Critique

Abstract

Les theses dites de la croissance endogene mettent fort justement en avant le role clef dun certain nombre de secteurs economiques dans le phenomene de croissance des revenus. Cependant, la modelisation qui sy rattache conduit parallelement a emettre un certain nombre de jugements normatifs errones quant au role legitime de la puissance publique.En particulier, la structure meme des modeles de croissance endogene interdit de rendre compte du caractere subjectif de la valeur et neglige les aspects profondement individuels de laccumulation de capital. Par consequent, elle ne sinteresse quaux aspects materiels de cette derniere.Loin de justifier lintervention publique en vue daugmenter statistiquement le PIB (ou le PNB), les connaissances apportees par la theorie autrichienne conduisent a preferer la propriete naturelle et la liberte de contracter qui en decoule comme veritable moyen de faire croitre, a un rythme soutenu, les capitaux materiels et immateriels des individus.The so-called theories of endogeneous growth rightfully emphasize the key role of some particular economic sectors in the process of income growth. However, their modelling leads to erroneous normative judgements in the rightful role of the government authorities.The very structure of endogeneous growth models makes it impossible to account for the subjective character of value and disregards the deeply individual aspects of capital accumulation. Consequently, it only takes an interest in its material aspects.Far from justifying public intervention in order to statistically increase the GDP (or the GNP), the basic tenets of the Austrian theory rather lead to prefer natural property and the freedom to contract that goes with it, as real means to have the tangible and intangible individual assets grow at a steady rythm.