Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T07:36:30.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FROM “TIRED MUSCLES” TO “MIGHT-HAVE-BEENS”: A DEBATE ON THE NATURE OF COSTS IN THE LATE NINETEENTH CENTURY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2023

Fabio Barbieri Open the ORCID record for Fabio Barbieri [Opens in a new window]  and
Marcelo Lourenço Filho
Fabio Barbieri*
Affiliation:
Fabio Barbieri: Associate professor of economics at Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil.
Marcelo Lourenço Filho
Affiliation:
Marcelo Lourenço Filho: Graduate student in economics at Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil. Email: lourencofilhomarcelo@gmail.com
*
Email: fbarbieri@usp.br
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores a debate on the theory of cost that occurred in the 1890s between economist Silas MacVane and Austrian economists. MacVane defended the idea of objective “real cost” and the Austrians argued for subjective opportunity cost. Although this debate is rarely mentioned, it represents a noteworthy episode of active contrast between ideas on value and on cost, with implications that are relevant for contemporary economists. By highlighting the incompatibility of the objective and subjective conceptions of cost, this debate sheds light on the evolution of economic theory. The contributions of relatively unknown authors, such as MacVane and David Green, are also discussed. We interpret the debate in terms of the contrast between research programs based on wealth and on exchange, and note that the gradual shift in the period regarding the fundamental problem that informs economic theory is key to understanding the modern concept of cost.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 46 , Issue 1 , March 2024 , pp. 27 - 47
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of History of Economics Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alchian, Armen A. 1968. “Cost.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Volume 3. New York: Macmillan, pp. 404–415.Google Scholar
Böhm-Bawerk, Eugen. [1889] 1891. The Positive Theory of Capital. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Böhm-Bawerk, Eugen. 1890. “MacVane’s Political Economy.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 4 (3): 331–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhm-Bawerk, Eugen. 1894. “The Ultimate Standard of Value.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 5 (2):1–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhm-Bawerk, Eugen. 1903. Recent Literature on Interest: A Supplement to “Capital and Interest .” New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Buchanan, James M. 1978. Cost and Choice: An Inquiry in Economic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, James M., and Thirlby, George F., eds. 1981. L.S.E. Essays on Cost. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Cassel, Gustav. 1903. The Nature and Necessity of Interest. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Commons, John. R. [1934] 1990. Institutional Economics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Davenport, Herbert. J. 1908. Value and Distribution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dorfman, Joseph. 1949. The Economic Mind in American Civilization. Volume III: 1865–1918. New York: The Viking Press.Google Scholar
Edgeworth, Francis. 1894. “Professor Böhm-Bawerk on the Ultimate Standard of Value.” Economic Journal 4 (15): 518–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrison, Roger. 1999. “Eugen Von Böhm-Bawerk: Capital, Interest and Time.” In Holcombe, Randall G., ed., Fifteen Great Austrian Economists. Auburn: Ludwig Von Mises Institute, pp. 113–122.Google Scholar
Green, David I. 1891. “The Cause of Interest.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 5 (3): 361–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, David I. 1894. “Pain-Cost and Opportunity-Cost.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 8 (2): 218–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, David I. 1895. “Wieser’s Natural Value.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 5 (4): 52–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunning, J. Patrick. 1998. “Herbert J. Davenport’s Transformation of the Austrian Theory of Value and Cost.” In Rutherford, Malcolm, ed., The Economic Mind in America: Essays in the History of American Economics. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 99–127.Google Scholar
Harvard University. February 21, 1914. Harvard University Gazette IX (22).Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich August. 1992. The Fortunes of Liberalism: Essays on Austrian Economics and the Ideal of Freedom. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hicks, John. 1976. “‘Revolutions’ in Economics.” In Latsis, Spiro, ed., Method and Appraisal in Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 207–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hovenkamp, Herbert. 1990. “The First Great Law & Economics Movement.” Stanford Law Review 42 (4): 993–1058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauder, Emil. 1965. History of Marginal Utility Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, Frank H. 1928. “A Suggestion for Simplifying the Statement of the General Theory of Price.” Journal of Political Economy 36 (3): 353–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacVane, Silas M. 1887a. “Analysis of Cost of Production.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 1 (4): 481–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacVane, Silas M. 1887b. “The Theory of Business Profits.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 2 (1): 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacVane, Silas M. 1888. “Business Profits and Wages: A Rejoinder.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 2 (4): 453–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacVane, Silas M. 1890a. The Working Principles of Political Economy. New York: Effingham, Maynard & Company.Google Scholar
MacVane, Silas M. 1890b. “Böhm-Bawerk on Value and Wages.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 5 (1): 24–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacVane, Silas M. 1893a. “Marginal Utility and Value.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 7 (3): 255–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacVane, Silas M. 1893b. “The Austrian Theory of Value.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 4 (3): 12–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Alfred. 1888a. “Wages and Profits.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 2 (2): 218–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Alfred. 1888b. “Business Profits and Wages.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 3 (1): 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Alfred. [1890] 1920. Principles of Economics. Eighth edition. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mason, Edward S., and Lamont, Thomas S.. 1982. “The Harvard Department of Economics from the Beginning to World War II.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 97 (3): 383–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Notes, Personal. 1893. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 4: 106–115.Google Scholar
Planck, Max K. 1950. Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers. New York: Philosophical library.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph. A. [1954] 1981. History of Economic Analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Senior, Nassau W. 1836. An Outline of the Science of Political Economy. London: W. Clowes and Sons.Google Scholar
Spencer, David A. 2003. “The Labour-less Labour Supply Model in the Era before Philip Wicksteed.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 25 (4): 505–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, David A. 2004. “From Pain Cost to Opportunity Cost: The Eclipse of Work in Economic Theory.” History of Political Economy 36 (2): 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stigler, George J. 1958. “Ricardo and the 93% Labor Theory of Value.” American Economic Review 48 (3): 357–367.Google Scholar
Stigler, George J. 1994. Production and Distribution Theories. Piscataway: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Viner, Jacob. [1930] 2013. “First Term.” In Irwin, Douglas and Medema, Steven G., eds., Viner, Jacob: Lectures In Economics 301. London: Routledge, pp. 19–72.Google Scholar
Viner, Jacob. 1932. “The Doctrine of Comparative Costs.” Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 36 (2): 356–414.Google Scholar
Walker, Francis A. 1888. “A Reply to Mr. MacVane: On the Source of Business Profits.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 2 (3): 263–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wicksteed, Philip H. [1910] 1933. The Common Sense of Political Economy. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Wieser, Friedrich. [1876] 1929. “Über das Verhältnis der Kosten zum Wert.” In Hayek, Friedrich August, ed. Gesammelte Abhandlungen. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, pp. 377–404.Google Scholar
Wieser, Friedrich. [1889] 1893. Natural Value. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wieser, Friedrich. 1892. “The Theory of Value: A Reply to Professor MacVane.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2: 24–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar